Disclaimer: The opinions in my posts are my thoughts and not
for everyone. I can only identify what
is right for me. You may have very
different thoughts. I will enjoy reading
replies of dissent or agreement.
In my post last week I gave reasons that I do not care for
flavored bourbon. This week’s post
presents some of the same argument although to a lesser extent. I will restate that I think bourbon should
taste like bourbon. One could build an
argument that there is little difference in adding a flavor to bourbon by
dumping liquid flavor to a stainless tank of bourbon and putting bourbon into
barrels with liquid flavors of wine infused into the wood fibers. What if someone stored liquid cinnamon flavor
in an oak barrel for a year then emptied the barrel and put bourbon in it for a
few weeks? Would that be different that
just adding cinnamon liquid flavor to the bourbon?
To my palate, bourbon that has been aged in barrels used for
port, sherry, rum or anything else do not add anything to the flavor that I
find especially appealing. Adding
flavors from these other spirits or wines does add a different dimension to
flavors of bourbon drinkers should decide whether those added flavors
contribute to their enjoyment of the spirit.
To my taste, the red-headed bourbon aged in French oak is
among the best of the double casked bourbons but I honestly prefer the
excellent regular edition of the wonderful wheated bourbon, especially the cask
strength. I find the experiments being
done by the distillery with a large grazing herbivorous land mammal on the
label are the most interesting. They are
aging bourbon in white oak barrels from different places in the tree. Since botanical chemicals are stored in the
xylem tissue (wood) in different places, this research could give distillers
and coopers some information on selecting the best barrels for aging bourbons
of different mash bills.
When I have had some “double oaked” bourbons, I have liked
them but found that the regular offering from the distiller was better. One bourbon associated with a race in
Louisville offers a very good double oaked bourbon. However, their regular bourbon is pretty darn
good. The double oaked is different but
not, to my taste, better. The extra
barrel aging seems to make the make the bourbon to “oaky smoky” for me. To my logic, if you can make some of the best
bourbon in the world by aging in one barrel then why mess with success? Of course, the double barreled costs a little
more. I won’t pay more for a bourbon
that I don’t like as well.
As stated earlier, these are my thoughts based on what I
like in bourbon. Readers of this post
will have very different tastes.
I agree with your opinion on the flavored bourbon topic. The cast strength / double oak / any other straight bourbon ( non flavor infused ) are great. I am really excited about these great bourbon company's expanding their products and trying new things for the consumer . Regardless the new products hitting the market , it's still from the great state of Kentucky ( 95% ), I like them all ! Some more than others , I will never pass up trying new products !
ReplyDeleteAgree whiskies don't want "flavorings" though there are traditional barrel modifications (like charring) that work very well.
ReplyDelete