1792 Ridgemont Reseve and Knob Creek Single Barrel Store Select vs. Retail

Having recently been very impressed by a couple store-selected single barrel bourbons (in particular a Kroger 1792 and a Liquor Barn Russel’s Reserve), I thought it would be interesting to see what difference there is in a name. Specifically, the name of someone’s store on a bottle. I’ve often placated myself that master distillers would always…

Barrel Select

Having recently been very impressed by a couple store-selected single barrel bourbons (in particular a Kroger 1792 and a Liquor Barn Russel’s Reserve), I thought it would be interesting to see what difference there is in a name. Specifically, the name of someone’s store on a bottle. I’ve often placated myself that master distillers would always put their best whiskey into their own retail releases, and that any private barrels would be from the same quality of stock. I’m not the type of person that rushes out to get the latest and greatest store release if there are single barrels picked by the master distiller available anytime. However, after a recent disappointment with this very bottle of Knob Creek Single Barrel compared to the first Liquor Barn selected bottle that introduced me to this product, I decided a head to head was in order. So here are my thoughts on a couple recent retail releases versus their store select counterparts:

1792 Ridgemont Reserve Barrel Select – 93.75 Proof, approximately 8 years old, high-rye recipe (it says barrel select in the name, so they’re all specially selected right?)

Retail Version – Paid $28.99 (ranges anywhere from $25-30)

Nose: esters (coconut and banana), maple syrup, caramel, very sweet, faint candied nuts

Taste: extremely sweet mid-palate, candy corn, rye spice and cardamom/clove spice, hints of bitter orange particularly on the finish, medium length finish. Overall satisfying and easy

BBB Rating: 3 Barrels, but perhaps the low end because of the simplicity and sweetness. This is basically an extra aged VOB 6 Year BIB that is good for cocktails, sipping or on the rocks and is priced right.

Rarity: Albino Squirrel, can be found most places in Kentucky but is occasionally mysteriously absent.

Kroger Single Barrel Select – Paid $25.99 on sale at Kroger

Nose: toffee, leather, sweet pipe tobacco, rye spice

Taste: much more wood/deep flavor, good and prominent rye spice, red fruits, very balanced sweetness, medium-long finish of good tannic wood (think red wine aftertaste)

BBB Rating: 3.5 Barrels. The increase in complexity compared to the retail version is amazing. If the tannic back end were slightly tamed and more balanced, this could easily be a 4 Barrel bourbon.

Rarity: Giraffe. Very seldom have I seen barrel picks of this, but they are out there. I think it’s a giraffe simply because you never know who will be smart enough to pick up a barrel.

Knob Creek Single Barrel – 120 proof, aged 9 years, traditional recipe bourbon

Retail version – Paid $35.99

Nose: Beam yeastiness is nicely covered by rich barrel notes, but is there to let you know it’s beam. Tart cherry, something citrusy (almost like lemon baked goods).

Taste: Red fruits are dominant, with barrel notes to round it out. Still has the Beam ‘yeastiness’, but that is mostly on the back end and is muted. Even with water added, the alcohol hits a little too hard giving a distinct boozy color to the otherwise good flavors. The finish is very tannic, like a good dry wine. I want a cigar to go with this.

BBB Rating: 3 Barrels, but on the low end. This is a solid bourbon, but it is the bottle that disappointed me originally compared to the Liquor Barn select I started with. I was going to give it 2.5 Barrels, but after further consideration, realized that was just my comparative disappointment talking. I’d still rather have this than our 2.5 Barrel standard, Maker’s Mark.

Rarity: Squirrel

Liquor Barn Barrel Select – Paid $39.99

Nose: Red fruits, and again something like citrus baked goods. Cinnamon/clove and wood smoke (the good kind, like when you’re smoking meat). The classic Beam yeastiness is nearly completely hidden.

Taste: Much sweeter on the front with TONS of vanilla and toffee. The finish rounds out with fantastic cinnamon/clove and bitter orange. Hints of red fruit in the mid-palate. Really no yeasty beam flavor to speak of. The longer I supped it, the more I started to get some hints of rye.

BBB Rating: 4 Barrels, but just by a hair. Yea I went there. The difference between this and the retail version is night and day. I like this a whole lot. This is a bourbon that you keep sipping on to try and identify what that flavor is, and by the time you figure one out, the glass is empty. Guess it’s time for another.

Rarity: Bear. Liquor barn has tons of the stuff, but it is a single barrel, and it all depends on how close you live to a Liquor barn.

We Bring You, The News!

In an effort to continue our focus on giving you the primary sources whenever possible, we’ve started a new page on the site: News! We wanted to be able to bring you the latest (confirmed) bourbon news, yet keep the main page clutter-free and limited to podcasts, content pieces, and the occasional review. Our solution is…

In an effort to continue our focus on giving you the primary sources whenever possible, we’ve started a new page on the site: News! We wanted to be able to bring you the latest (confirmed) bourbon news, yet keep the main page clutter-free and limited to podcasts, content pieces, and the occasional review. Our solution is the new page you can link to on the top bar of the site, or click HERE for a direct link. This page will include news on new releases, bourbon industry news, media pieces we think are worth a read, etc. Our commentary on them will be limited to none, so you can go read for yourselves and make your own decisions. The main page will continue to harbor all of our bourbon-laiden sass, if that’s what you prefer. And honestly, that’s what you come here for right? This is a work in progress, and we’ll probably tailor it to your feedback, so let us know what you think. Cheers fellow Bourbon Evangelists!

New TTB Whiskey Labeling Guidelines

If you’ve been paying any attention in the last year, you’ve heard of all the hubbub about correctly labeling whiskey, and more specifically bourbon. A lot of this has had to do with where something is distilled versus where it is produced/bottled. We’re looking at you Templeton Rye. Something that has been somewhat more nebulous…

If you’ve been paying any attention in the last year, you’ve heard of all the hubbub about correctly labeling whiskey, and more specifically bourbon. A lot of this has had to do with where something is distilled versus where it is produced/bottled. We’re looking at you Templeton Rye. Something that has been somewhat more nebulous is the correct stating of age in whiskey. You’d think this is pretty straight forward, but there is a lot of creative wording out there. Presumably in an effort to combat this, the TTB has come out with new phrasing for its guidelines. Thanks to Chuck Cowdery for the heads up on his blog. I’ll put the new wording below it’s found in the FAQ section of the TTB site.

The most interesting thing I noticed is that any product labelled as ‘whisk(e)y’ must have an age statement if it is less than 4 years old. Down to the hour if applicable. Previously, I think this only applied to whiskies that have been labelled ‘straight’ that were less than 4 years old and any whiskey less than 2 years old. This seems to suggest that this now applies to any whiskey product less than 4 years old.

They also define the aging statement as referring to time in ‘new oak containers’ for any ‘straight’ product. I suppose this is to prevent counting any aging in a barrel finished process. I’m not aware of anyone putting straight whiskey into used barrels later in the aging process and counting that towards the age, but this seems logical to prevent this kind of nefarious behavior.

It also adds specific examples at the bottom of how to label blended whiskies. Not so applicable to us Bourbon Evangelists, but interesting none the less that they felt it necessary.

What do you guys think about this? Personally I’m for anything that gives me the opportunity to be more confident of what I’m actually drinking. Does anyone else wish that Bottled-in-Bond would make a come back?

New Wording of Whiskey Labeling  

Is an age statement required on a whisky label?
The TTB regulations at 27 CFR 5.40(a) require an age statement on the label of any whisky that has not been aged for at least four years. This requirement applies to any whisky produced by mixing or blending if the youngest whisky in the mixture or blend has been aged for less than four years. An age statement is optional for any whisky that is four years old or more, unless the label makes a representation as to age or maturity. See 27 CFR 5.40(e)(2) for rules applying to age, maturity, and similar representations.

What is the “age” of a whisky?
The TTB regulations at 27 CFR 5.11 define the term “age” to mean the period during which, after distillation and before bottling, distilled spirits have been stored in oak containers. For bourbon whisky, rye whisky, wheat whisky, malt whisky, or rye malt whisky, and for straight whisky other than straight corn whisky, the “age” is the period during which the whisky has been stored in charred new oak containers.

Do the format rules for mandatory age statements also apply to optional age statements?
The regulations at 27 CFR 5.40(a)(5) provide that optional age statements must appear in the same form as required statements. See 27 CFR 5.40 and Chapter 8 of the Beverage Alcohol Manual (BAM) for additional information about optional age statements.

What information must be included in an age statement?
The age of the whisky must be stated in hours, days, months, or years, as appropriate. The age may be understated, but the age may not be overstated. See 27 CFR 5.40(a)(4) for the requirements regarding disclosure of aging in reused barrels for certain products.

How should age be stated if the whisky consists of a mixture or blend of whiskies with different ages?
If the whisky contains no neutral spirits, the age must be stated either as the age of the youngest whisky, or as a statement that includes the age of each whisky in the mixture or blend, and the percentage of that whisky in the mixture or blend. If percentages are listed, they must be based on the percentage of the finished product, on a proof gallon basis, contributed by each listed whisky, and the percentages listed must add up to 100%. If the whisky contains neutral spirits, see 27 CFR 5.40(a)(2) for rules that apply to statements of age and percentage.

Can the age statement include minimum or maximum ages?
As noted above, age may be understated, but may not be overstated. A minimum age (such as “aged at least __ years”) is acceptable, but a maximum age (such as “aged for less than ___ years”) is not acceptable.

I am bottling a straight whisky that consists of one straight whisky that has been aged for 3 years and another straight whisky that has been aged for 2 years. The older whisky makes up 60% of the mixture, on a proof gallon basis, and the younger whisky makes up the remaining 40%. Can I simply label the product as having been “Aged for less than 4 years”?
No. The statement “aged for less than 4 years” does not satisfy the requirements of 27 CFR 5.40 for an age statement, and it creates a misleading impression as to the age of the product. You may choose to label the product with an age statement that reflects the age of the youngest whisky (“Aged 2 years”) or you can set out the percentage of each whisky, with its age (60% straight whisky aged 3 years; 40% straight whisky aged 2 years”).

What are examples of acceptable formats for age statements?
The following formats are acceptable:
_____ years old.
____ months old.
Aged _____ years.
Aged at least ____ years.
Aged a minimum of ____ months.
Over ____ years old.
Aged not less than ____ years.
___% whisky aged __ years; __% whisky aged ___ years.

What are examples of age statements that are not acceptable?
TTB will not approve labels with the following age statements, because they list a maximum age instead of a minimum age, and thus may mislead consumers as to the age of the product:
Aged less than ____ years.
Under ____ years old.
Aged not more than ____ years.

Around the Barrel #1

Hello, fellow Bourbon Evangelists! We’re back with a little something new for you. Sort of like our version of the Fireside Chat, we bring you the first Around the Barrel cast! In an effort to record more often and get information to you in a more timely manner, we’ve decided to start doing some casts in-between…

2015-01-18 21.50.59

Hello, fellow Bourbon Evangelists! We’re back with a little something new for you. Sort of like our version of the Fireside Chat, we bring you the first Around the Barrel cast! In an effort to record more often and get information to you in a more timely manner, we’ve decided to start doing some casts in-between our large historical and scientific pieces. These will include news, events, bourbon reviews, commentary on the bourbon world, and anything else we get into while sippin’ around the barrel. We hope that this way we will have more time for our larger research pieces, as well as allow more time to rant quixotically about news, reviews, and miscellaneous bourbon culture. Let us know what you think in the comments, or on our Facebook and Twitter feeds!

Herein we talk about upcoming events, new releases, our coverage of the Bourbon Classic, the bourbon boom, non-distiller producers, and review some high-proof bourbons. For those of you playing at home, we review Old Grand Dad 114 Proof, Stagg Jr., and Willett 9 Year single barrel with some surprising results. Cheers!

Listen to the cast here:

Around the Barrel #1 1/18/15

Here are links to things we discuss in the cast:

Bourbon Classic

Derby Museum Legends Series

Bourbon Boom Statistics courtesy of the Courier-Journal

Maraschino Cherry Recipe – We recommend adding less Luxardo, some orange zest and about 1 tsp almond extract.

The Bourbon Classic

We can officially announce that we’ll be covering the Bourbon Classic February 20-21st in Louisville! This is basically bourbon nirvana, so we highly recommend you check it out. If you’re planning to come, let us know and we’ll meet up for some of the good stuff! More info to come later. Here’s the link! The…

The_Bourbon_Classic_Louisville

We can officially announce that we’ll be covering the Bourbon Classic February 20-21st in Louisville! This is basically bourbon nirvana, so we highly recommend you check it out. If you’re planning to come, let us know and we’ll meet up for some of the good stuff! More info to come later. Here’s the link!

The Bourbon Classic

Blind Wheated Bourbon Tasting by Chris

Greetings fellow Bourbon Evangelists! We’ve been mostly dark over the holidays. We’ve both been hanging out with family and I’ve been dealing with an obscene amount of paperwork. While we finish up Part 2 of the Prohibition extravaganza, I thought I’d post an interesting little activity I did over the break. I was perusing my…

Greetings fellow Bourbon Evangelists! We’ve been mostly dark over the holidays. We’ve both been hanging out with family and I’ve been dealing with an obscene amount of paperwork. While we finish up Part 2 of the Prohibition extravaganza, I thought I’d post an interesting little activity I did over the break.

I was perusing my collection and noticed a Very Special Old Fitzgerald 12 Year Old hiding in the back. Needing an excuse to open it, I decided to do a blind tasting with some things I had on hand. Since Heaven Hill, makers of Old Fitzgerald, are discontinuing their 1849 label and shunting this towards the newer Larceny brand, I figured that would make a good comparison. I  added some of the Weller line as a wheated baseline, and then couldn’t resist sticking Van Winkle Lot B 12 Year in to see where it shook out. I did the tasting blind, wrote down all my thoughts, and only then looked at the ‘answers’. So what you’re getting is a label-blind perspective on these bottles. Identity of each bourbon is at the bottom so you can read it blind, as I tasted, if you want. Enjoy!

2015-01-11 18.53.12

Number 1

Nose: Thick, syrupy, plenty of wood (more of the planty expression of wood rather than vanilla), hints of bananas, candied nuts

Taste: smooth, refined, brown sugar, red fruits/berries, toffee, something coconut or otherwise estery, medium length finish into nice barrel notes, good mouth feel (if a little thin), finish fades to slightly tannic black tea flavor

BBB Rating: 3 barrels (was a 3.5, but the lingering tannic/black tea ended up downgrading it)

Guess: Weller 12 Year Old

Number 2

Nose: something distinctly Beam-like/yeasty, bananas, some young moonshine notes, cashews

Taste: spearmint, lightly sweet, fair amount of corn, some baking spice (clove and allspice), pretty thin finish, faint barrel vanilla

Rating: 2.5 barrels, on par with Maker’s Mark

Guess: Larceny

Number 3

Nose: Very rich, vanilla, caramel, red fruits, something distinctly Buffalo Trace, spicy in the non-rye sense, reminds me of apple pie

Taste: full/fills the mouth, great esters (green apple/coconut), good barrel to round out the back, nice long mellowing finish that stays pleasant without getting tannic

Rating: 4 Barrels, slightly overpowering ethanol nose and taste nearly kept it at a 3.5

Guess: Weller Antique 107 Proof

Number 4

Nose: wet wood, backed with decent barrel notes, again something nutty/cashew, fruity and pleasing

Taste: leads with barrel and sweetness, ethanol there in a good way, vanilla and toffee fade into a nice almost butterscotch, medium to long finish that stays pleasent

Rating: 3 Barrels

Guess: Very Special Old Fitzgerald 12 Year Old

Number 5

Nose: thick syrupy nose, red fruits, candy, backed by good barrel, not too much ethanol, something slightly astringent, pleasant

Taste: creamy, good level of sweetness and barrel (vanilla/pralines), good esters (mostly coconut), medium to quick finish, much better balance than #1 despite similar flavors

Rating: 3.5 barrels

Guess: Van Winkle 12 Year Old Lot B

The Answers

1: Weller 12 Year Old

2: Very Special Old Fitzgerald 12 Year Old

3: Weller Antique 107 Proof

4: Larceny

5: Van Winkle Lot B 12 Year Old

Comments:

The Weller Antique was a major standout in this lineup, and my favorite overall. I was very surprised that I enjoyed the Larceny significantly more than the 12 Year Old Fitzgerald. Heaven Hill has done a great job selecting the barrels for this expression. Somewhat as expected, the Van Winkle had a more complex, and slightly more enjoyable nose and taste than the Weller 12 despite the same mash bill, but not nearly enough to account for the price/availability difference. Let us know if you guys have had similar experiences, cheers!