Tastes

Rating: 21/23 It's been months since I opened this, but I'm finally getting around to taking notes. I was pretty underwhelmed by this when I first opened it (perhaps like I was with Wild Turkey Rare Breed). It had a strong flavor, but no depth. I left it alone and came back a few months later though and what a difference that made! Now, it's delicious and complex. I worry that I might have just gotten an especially good barrel because I have never liked any of the other Jack Daniel's offerings all that much, but this particular bottle stands out to me as one of the best bourbons I've ever tasted. Is it as good as George T. Stagg or William Larue Weller? No. Is it surprisingly close for only $55? Yes. It is a more traditional bourbon than Joseph Magnus, Murray Hill Club, or Corsair Grainiac, which are also exceptional bourbons, but definitely have quirks. It's much richer and more powerful than Wild Turkey Jewbilee, so the two occupy opposite ends of the more traditional spectrum, despite being of similar quality. I'm frankly shocked by how much I like this considering how much banana flavor is in it and my prior lack of enthusiasm for Jack Daniel's. N: The nose is disappointingly and surprisingly faint. After a few minutes though, I get banana that isn't overly sweet with a mature wood (light creosote) melded nicely with subtle baking spices and a rounded vanilla. There's a surprising bit of tartness as well off and on - possibly sort of a fermented green banana smell? P: It's a bit harsh, but mostly that's just the alcohol burn from the huge proof. It's rich and viscous with this banana sweetness that blends with the caramel/toffee and vanilla and has a greenness to it that keeps it under control. There are some nice baking spices in here that bring in a woodiness that tastes mature without being aggressive and has some bits of herbal creosote flavor as it continues, getting into leather territory a little bit even. It's a delightfully hedonistic palate that Gradually grows more complex as I sit with it. It's not amazingly complex, but it has a solid amount of complexity and a delightful amount of hedonism. I usually hate banana in my bourbon, but this is fantastic. F: The green banana, toffee and vanilla linger most of all as the woodier elements quickly vanish. The alcohol lingers a bit, but if you've made it through that powerful f=palate, this is nothing. The spices are faintly still present, with cinnamon being more prevalent than before. A very good finish with a lighter, sweeter character that serves as a bit of a reprieve from the powerful palate. A faint hint of banana laffy taffy brings in a hint of mineral, but it works because it is such a minor note. It's been an intense side-by-side, but my Russell's Reserve Single Barrel that has had a year and a half of substantial oxygen is pretty much on par with this. I've been on the fence between 21 and 22 for this after eliminating 20 a while back and while I think that this is a little bit better than the Russell's (which I deemed a 21), I don't think that it quite rises to the level of 22. Still, it's a darned good deal, if this bottle is representative, particularly considering the drinkability out of the bottle combined with the incinerating proof. It's worth considering in terms of VFM that the Russell's earned a 21 after 18 months of heavy oxidation, whereas this earned it after fewer than 6 of mild oxidation. Since the two are pretty much the same price, I will absolutely reach for this over Russell's the next time that I see them in a store. Hopefully, I didn't just get an exceptional barrel for this bottle. The complexity and balance really sell me on a profile that I didn't think I'd enjoy. Those who are put off by banana might want to avoid this, but I consider myself one of the biggest banana haters (in bourbon and eggnog) out there and I love it. It's incredibly difficult to rate something that's this good because there are few things I can compare it with. I spent ages torn between 21 and 22 for this. I think I'm going in the direction of a 21, but I would not be at all shocked if I raised it to 22 on a subsequent tasting. This is a fantastic bourbon and it is especially amazing for the price. I'm leaning toward a 21 instead of 22 because the complexity doesn't always show through and sometimes Elijah Craig Barrel Proof (B520) and Wild Turkey Rare Breed (116.8) show more character. And this is nowhere near the level of complexity that Corsair Grainiac (a dissimilar but also phenomenal whiskey) has. Still, sitting with this for a bit, complexity starts coming out to round out its awesome richness. The complexity here largely relates to the banana, but the banana never gets out of control somehow. That green banana flavor must be doing the trick and blending into the wood nicely. I could actually spend quite a while contemplating this in a hedonistic way. That scores big points in my book. Side by side with Wild Turkey Rare Breed 116.8, Elijah Craig B520, and Corsair Grainiac, I have little doubt that this surpasses the first two. Although this is very different from the Grainiac, I find it much harder to choose a winner between them and I keep going back and forth. At the end of the day, neither of them can be lower than a 20 but both have problems that keep them from scoring a perfect 23. Side by side...I really can't choose, but I appreciate that the Grainiac's complexity shows through no matter the circumstance. I'm borderline between a 21 and 22 on both of these, but considering that the Grainiac is probably just a smidge better, I think that I'd better put this at a 21 for now. I definitely feel like I'm wussing out a bit here because this is definitely better than Russell's Reserve Single Barrel oxidized for a ridiculously long time, which was solidly a 21, but I have so little to compare this with that it's hard to justify a 22. For a last-minute mixup, I poured some Joseph Magnus, which I previously rated a 21. Great, I'm now comparing a fairly standard (banana-y) bourbon with a light but complex one and a finished one. So, yeah, hard to compare. I've continued agonizing over this and what I can conclude at this point is that all 3 are in the 21 to 22 range. If I could come up with a definitive ordering, I could give them different ratings, but given how different they are stylistically, that isn't going so well. Given that, I'm going to handwave and cite "statistics" to assert that they're all more likely to be 21s than 22s and ignore the human element of this comparison so that I can just be done with this. Perhaps when I open my bottle of George T. Stagg 2019 that will be a clearer 22 and then I can use that as a basis for comparison with this. 21 for now, but it could easily end up being a 22. Right now though, I think that Elijah Craig B520 is a clearer 22. I like how much richer and darker its flavor is, though the variation on flavors here with some interesting subtlety gives this some nice life, particularly with the green bananas and wood maintaining the terrific balance. The deciding factor for me here is the harshness, which - while not bad for the proof - is noticeably stronger here than in the Elijah Craig B520. They're both excellent, but I give the nod to the Elijah Craig. For the money, it's very hard to come anywhere near this quality. Truly, an outcome that I didn't see coming. Very well done, Jack Daniel's.

Rating: 22/23 This is it, the legend among legends, the bourbon that goes toe-to-toe with bourbons 10x its cost: Elijah Craig Barrel Proof B520! N: After giving it a while to breathe, the nose goes from essentially non-existent to woody and musty like an attic. There's a chocolateyness along with some cinnamon and a little bit of dried tart cherries too. I wouldn't say that this is a really interesting nose, but it suggests some fantastic richness on the palate. P: The palate is rich and full of flavor. It's bursting with wood, chocolate, and cinnamon. A little bit of allspice, ginger, and clove come in too. And there's this delightful creamy flavor. I get a hint of maple that borders on molasses a bit because of the creosote from the wood and spices. The alcohol does bring out a bit of a dark tart cherry flavor and a bit of banana that has some greenness to it. It's mature and a bit musty. The alcohol does show through, but it isn't really harsh. F: It's a long rich finish. The more bitter side lingers more with a full flavor. The wood is there moreso than the chocolate or spices, and the fruit is entirely gone. It is bold and lasting in a way that reminds me of the grandeur of the palate though. This is richer than Wild Turkey Rare Breed (which is already quite rich, so that says a lot about this!), but it isn't as funky and complex. Jack Daniels Single Barrel Barrel Proof probably sits in between the two of these with its richer, sweeter flavor than the Wild Turkey and its greater complexity compared with this. The three are all excellent with quite distinct profiles though. This has the greatest richness and its chocolate and musty woodiness really work together to build up some complexity over time. Continuing tasting these side by side, I think I am leaning more and more toward this as my favorite. The Wild Turkey (although excellent) is clearly the worst, but the Jack Daniel's is pretty top notch. This was kind of just hot and cinnamony when I opened it, but as time has gone on it has really developed nicely from the oxidization. I wish I had some George T. Stagg 2018 to try side by side with this. For $70, this is a very tasty dram. I'm not sure that the value for the money beats Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof at $55 or Wild Turkey Rare Breed (116.8) at $45 as one to load up the bunker with, but I'll be watching subsequent Elijah Craig Barrel Proof releases intently. It sounds like the C920 is probably a pass, but I'm looking forward to trying the A121! The neck pour of this landed in the 18 to 19 range, probably just slightly behind a fairly well oxidized bottle of Wild Turkey Rare Breed, but ahead of a very nicely oxidized bottle of Eagle Rare. With a couple months of oxidation, this has really improved. The one-note cinnamon bite has been replaced by some delicious chocolate that balances beautifully with the increased presence of the musty aspect of the wood. This tastes old and it has that subtlety and balance to its age like one would find in an old (18-25 year) scotch. I'm shocked, but this is now competing squarely with George T. Stagg 2018, which up until now has been my favorite bourbon of all time! That means that this is a 22 to 23. Wow. Initially, this tasted like a kind of bland - but rich - bourbon. It was very good, bit uncomplex and uninteresting. Some oxygen has really helped it though. It now tastes more mature than Wild Turkey Rare Breed, though it does tastes less complex. I get this immense, rich, bourbon character to it, but it does take a bit of water to bring it out. From a hedonism perspective, this is excellent. Cinnamon, rich rood, chocolate, and so on. For the money, I think I'd take the Wild Turkey Rare Breed if I had to drink it without letting it oxidize, but the time aging with a 2/3 full bottle has really brought the flavors out here. I no longer lean toward Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof in terms of preference, but I can stop to appreciate each in its own right. This is much richer than Corsair Grainiac, but it is certainly less complex. It's sort of a three-way battle among this, the Jack Daniel's, and the Corsair. This must be at least a 21 rather than the 18 I was originally going to assign it. I'd better grab another bottle while I can! I guess I have to conclude in the end that I prefer this to Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof just a bit, though both are awesome. After tax and all that, this is something like $15 more, so I'm not sure it's a better value for the money since they're really close. Still, I'm not entirely sure that this beats the Corsair Grainiac, which I snagged for only $50 (though that does have a lower proof), in terms of value or quality, but it's highly competitive. I love the bold, richness here. It shows it's age wonderfully without tasting over-oaked. In fact, it even tastes closer to 15 years old. I think that this falls a bit shy of a 23, but I wouldn't be shocked if I came back and upped it to one later. The burn is a bit much here and I would like a bit more complexity, but that rich chocolate flavor with the wood and spices is delicious and it really reminds me of George T. Stagg. I am looking forward to one day uncorking my bottle of Stagg and comparing it with this side by side! So, a glorious 22 for now. That's only after giving it 2 to 3 months of air though - otherwise it's more of an 18. I strongly recommend putting in the time and effort to give it that air.

Rating: 21/23 Another tasting of Corsair's legendary bourbon that shouldn't have worked but somehow did! Is it as amazing as I remember it being? I sure hope so. N: The corn is obviously there, but the rye and spelt jump right out too. It took a minute, but I'm getting the buckwheat and barley as well. I might be getting a hint of creaminess from the oats, but that's usually more a component that affects the texture and palate, so that's no surprise. Oddly, I don't think I'm getting the quinoa right now. There's no way I'm getting the wheat, of course. I still don't no what triticale is, but maybe I can smell it. Wood with light creosote, apples, lemon rind, caramel, spices, clear oiliness, and faint nuttiness. None of the broader scents is anything particularly amazing, but the subtlety that allows the individual grains to show through is really stunning. P: The palate is on the lighter side, which is what allows the individual grains to show through. Unfortunately, this does mean that there's a bit of mineral the comes through. It reminds me of my first impressions of Eagle Rare in that regard. Getting past that though, I get apples, lemon rind, cherries, wood, spices, a little bit of light caramel. I can really pick out all of the grains. Well, except for the triticale and wheat I guess (unless I'm allowed to attribute some of the mellowness to the wheat). It's smooth, light, and tremendously complex. The grain really shows through here, but not in a way that makes the bourbon taste like young spirit, though I'm sure that it can't have been aged for long. I don't pick up any weird notes from excessive heads or tails. A fantastic palate, though not one that will suit those who just want a big, rich, strong bourbon. That bit of smoky creosote does help to give this a bit of maturity in spite of its mellowness, sort of like Eagle Rare I guess. F: Apples and minerals. A bit of spices that mix well with the wood, which still retains a little bit of creosote. There's just a little bit of harshness, but it works well with the spices and lemon peel brightness. It's tragic that this is a one-off. Corsair, if you're listening, this should be your flagship! It's a new take on bourbon with really great execution. I'd love to see how a bit more tweaking might be able to bring down the minerality and bring out more fullness. It's an easy sipper and a surprisingly good introductory bourbon because of its lightness. I'm absolutely amazed that the individual grains are identifiable in this. Well, at least 7 of them are for sure and I understand why I struggle with the other 2. This should have been a muddled mess with a high chance of being completely out of balance. If you pitched this 9 grain premise to me today, I'd say that the best chance you had to make anything decent was to produce a traditional 4 grain bourbon with a few teaspoonfuls of the other 5 grains. That absolutely is not what Corsair did and their boldness had bred great success! This is definitely not one to pass up given the opportunity to taste it. I realized that I found this kind of reminiscent of Eagle Rare in this element of lightness and balance that it has. To get a baseline, I tried them both side-by-side when I had a worn out palate just to get the basic profile. This was a pretty new bottle of Eagle Rare, so I'm not going to commit to it being anything better than a solid 15 or maybe 16, but it's still a useful baseline. The Eagle Rare was richer, but even on a worn out palate, the Corsair's complexity really leapt out. I would give the win to the Corsair here. Since the main point of this bourbon is its complexity, I think that the worn out comparison confidently sets a minimum bar of 16 for it. I can't imagine a 23 given the lightness and minerality, but a 22 is definitely possible. If I just split the difference and called it a day, I would be giving this a 19, which is an excellent rating already. That would tie this with Wild Turkey Rare Breed 116, for example. Realistically, I think I will be giving this something in the 19 to 22 range - though that is not to suggest in any way that my rating will fall in the middle of that spectrum. I've never tried this and thought that it was less than great. It's clearly young, but the complexity is just amazing. It's very different from Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof, but I'm trying them side by side because they're both so incredibly good (particularly for the price). Honestly, it's a tough call between them and Jack Daniel's is a 21 at worst, so there's no way that this is a 19 and I'm doubting a 20 as well. This isn't exactly low proof itself, but it never comes across as harsh and the alcohol never shows through. On a reasonable, though perhaps suboptimal, palate, this is at least as good as the Jack Daniels due to its immense complexity. I really think that this has to be at least a 21. So it's a 21 to 22. It's a really tough call here. I love how complex this is without tasting overly young. Sure, it's on the light side and it's restrained at times, but it doesn't taste weak either. It's more like it's elegant. I think I'd place this at least on par with Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof, but I'm not sure I'd put it as high up as Elijah Craig B520. It's especially tough to rate this because it just is not all that much like the other bourbons that I've rated this highly. I think I'm going to give it a 21 for now, but if it changes, I expect it to go up to a 22.

21: The nose is a delight just to smell on its own. It has all sorts of rich, fruity, earthy, complex character to it. The palate is delightful as well with awesome complexity. There's a maltiness that blends excellently with the prominent rich earthy vegetal oiliness of the buckwheat blending with a hint of quinoa earthy dirt. The corn sweetness forms a clear foundation while some rye minerality lightens the drink without making it seem watery or uncomplex and blends nicely with that hint of spelt bitterness and tartness. There is some delicious apricot flavor that is fairly floral and blends well with the bits of vanilla and juicy cherry from the quinoa. Some of that more savory, vegetal, sweet, herbal, rough side of the rye comes out too at times, giving the bourbon a fuller character. It has a fair amount of spice, which does unfortunately make it seem a little bit harsh both because of its proof and somewhat light mineral flavor and because the cinnamon is lighter and has less of that sweet corn flavor than is usual for a bourbon, really giving the ginger and allspice the center stage and letting a little bit of clove in too. This is a terrific bourbon overall and it's amazing that I can pick out the corn, rye, barley, buckwheat, quinoa, and spelt. I have no idea what triticale tastes like and wheat is always hard to taste, so it may be to blame for some of the lightness and minerality. I have no idea why I can't taste the oats though. Still, being able to actually pick out 6 grains in a 9 grain bourbon suggests expert distilling and blending. This is well worth stocking (if you can still find a bottle). It isn't perfect because of the minerality, lightness and spice imbalance, and it certainly is something that should only be tasted with a clean palate, but it's still excellent. I currently have it at a 21 and I don't think it's a 22. It's definitely a 19 though and I think most likely at least a 20. I'll leave it at 21 for now.

22: The nose is robust with some varied fruit, sort of like Cognac is playing games. There's a woody element that's rich in the background. Spice, vanilla, caramel: this nose has a lot going on and it varies constantly! The palate is likewise very interesting. This is a huge refinement on the Corsair Quinoa that is super interesting with tons of subtle layers of fruit that don't make it taste excessively sweet and blend terrifically with the rich woody backing. This isn't the richest and heartiest bourbon, but it's delicious like a rich XO Cognac mixed with bourbon. I just can't get over all of the layers here. There's a ton of fruit and some spice and a hint of rye, but there's still some really nice wood and spice with a sweet coating of vanilla. The balance is somehow impeccable and it's truly delightful. Corsair has really nailed it with the bourbon, innovating and pushing the boundaries of what a bourbon can be while balancing numerous layers of very good flavor. This is a really special bourbon. I'd like it to be a little richer, but it really is rich and the flavors fit well together. It compares favorably with Wild Turkey Whiskey Jewbillee. It's actually pretty floral at points, but not in that gross, bitter Irish whiskey way.

There isn't much scent. It's alcohol, tartness, and a little vanilla. So, bourbon I guess. There's some red fruity sweetness like apples mixed with strawberries and maybe a little plum. The flavor is very fruity. It's just bursting with strawberry, cherry, and plum. It's obscenely refreshing without tasting like gross cherry. What on Earth is this? Beyond the fruitiness, there is a bit of orange blossom and plenty of vanilla. There is some harshness here from the alcohol, but although there is some ginger, the spice is not overwhelming. This is a really unique bourbon. It reminds me of Knob Creek Single Barrel, but it kicks the fruitiness up a notch. There is some wood that has a bit of bitter coffee to it. The flavor is a bit more bitter than. I would like, but it's still good. There are minerals that come with some hints of honey that add complexity and make this an interesting variation on the usual bourbon formula. Especially at this proof, it's surprising that this bourbon is not terribly aggressive. I like that the spices step back and let the other flavors talk. There might be a little caramel, but its understated and plays well with the honey. The finish is a nice balance of rich and sweet and the spiciness that is present prevents this whiskey from tasting too mild. The orange blossoms blend with apricot in a beautiful manner. There are no bad notes in here and there are lots of good ones. This is a remarkable success. It's a wholey different bourbon, but it is a great one. There's some tartness and mineral, but it isn't too bad. With the toffee elements, there's a surprising amount of malty character in here, but it fades to corn in moderate order. The balance is impressive, but the distinctness of the flavors is more so. With 9 grains, it's amazing that this tastes like anything other than mush. This is a triumph of distilling. There is so much going on here and the flavors are so good, often achieving greatness.

Rating: 21/23 It's been months since I opened this, but I'm finally getting around to taking notes. I was pretty underwhelmed by this when I first opened it (perhaps like I was with Wild Turkey Rare Breed). It had a strong flavor, but no depth. I left it alone and came back a few months later though and what a difference that made! Now, it's delicious and complex. I worry that I might have just gotten an especially good barrel because I have never liked any of the other Jack Daniel's offerings all that much, but this particular bottle stands out to me as one of the best bourbons I've ever tasted. Is it as good as George T. Stagg or William Larue Weller? No. Is it surprisingly close for only $55? Yes. It is a more traditional bourbon than Joseph Magnus, Murray Hill Club, or Corsair Grainiac, which are also exceptional bourbons, but definitely have quirks. It's much richer and more powerful than Wild Turkey Jewbilee, so the two occupy opposite ends of the more traditional spectrum, despite being of similar quality. I'm frankly shocked by how much I like this considering how much banana flavor is in it and my prior lack of enthusiasm for Jack Daniel's. N: The nose is disappointingly and surprisingly faint. After a few minutes though, I get banana that isn't overly sweet with a mature wood (light creosote) melded nicely with subtle baking spices and a rounded vanilla. There's a surprising bit of tartness as well off and on - possibly sort of a fermented green banana smell? P: It's a bit harsh, but mostly that's just the alcohol burn from the huge proof. It's rich and viscous with this banana sweetness that blends with the caramel/toffee and vanilla and has a greenness to it that keeps it under control. There are some nice baking spices in here that bring in a woodiness that tastes mature without being aggressive and has some bits of herbal creosote flavor as it continues, getting into leather territory a little bit even. It's a delightfully hedonistic palate that Gradually grows more complex as I sit with it. It's not amazingly complex, but it has a solid amount of complexity and a delightful amount of hedonism. I usually hate banana in my bourbon, but this is fantastic. F: The green banana, toffee and vanilla linger most of all as the woodier elements quickly vanish. The alcohol lingers a bit, but if you've made it through that powerful f=palate, this is nothing. The spices are faintly still present, with cinnamon being more prevalent than before. A very good finish with a lighter, sweeter character that serves as a bit of a reprieve from the powerful palate. A faint hint of banana laffy taffy brings in a hint of mineral, but it works because it is such a minor note. It's been an intense side-by-side, but my Russell's Reserve Single Barrel that has had a year and a half of substantial oxygen is pretty much on par with this. I've been on the fence between 21 and 22 for this after eliminating 20 a while back and while I think that this is a little bit better than the Russell's (which I deemed a 21), I don't think that it quite rises to the level of 22. Still, it's a darned good deal, if this bottle is representative, particularly considering the drinkability out of the bottle combined with the incinerating proof. It's worth considering in terms of VFM that the Russell's earned a 21 after 18 months of heavy oxidation, whereas this earned it after fewer than 6 of mild oxidation. Since the two are pretty much the same price, I will absolutely reach for this over Russell's the next time that I see them in a store. Hopefully, I didn't just get an exceptional barrel for this bottle. The complexity and balance really sell me on a profile that I didn't think I'd enjoy. Those who are put off by banana might want to avoid this, but I consider myself one of the biggest banana haters (in bourbon and eggnog) out there and I love it. It's incredibly difficult to rate something that's this good because there are few things I can compare it with. I spent ages torn between 21 and 22 for this. I think I'm going in the direction of a 21, but I would not be at all shocked if I raised it to 22 on a subsequent tasting. This is a fantastic bourbon and it is especially amazing for the price. I'm leaning toward a 21 instead of 22 because the complexity doesn't always show through and sometimes Elijah Craig Barrel Proof (B520) and Wild Turkey Rare Breed (116.8) show more character. And this is nowhere near the level of complexity that Corsair Grainiac (a dissimilar but also phenomenal whiskey) has. Still, sitting with this for a bit, complexity starts coming out to round out its awesome richness. The complexity here largely relates to the banana, but the banana never gets out of control somehow. That green banana flavor must be doing the trick and blending into the wood nicely. I could actually spend quite a while contemplating this in a hedonistic way. That scores big points in my book. Side by side with Wild Turkey Rare Breed 116.8, Elijah Craig B520, and Corsair Grainiac, I have little doubt that this surpasses the first two. Although this is very different from the Grainiac, I find it much harder to choose a winner between them and I keep going back and forth. At the end of the day, neither of them can be lower than a 20 but both have problems that keep them from scoring a perfect 23. Side by side...I really can't choose, but I appreciate that the Grainiac's complexity shows through no matter the circumstance. I'm borderline between a 21 and 22 on both of these, but considering that the Grainiac is probably just a smidge better, I think that I'd better put this at a 21 for now. I definitely feel like I'm wussing out a bit here because this is definitely better than Russell's Reserve Single Barrel oxidized for a ridiculously long time, which was solidly a 21, but I have so little to compare this with that it's hard to justify a 22. For a last-minute mixup, I poured some Joseph Magnus, which I previously rated a 21. Great, I'm now comparing a fairly standard (banana-y) bourbon with a light but complex one and a finished one. So, yeah, hard to compare. I've continued agonizing over this and what I can conclude at this point is that all 3 are in the 21 to 22 range. If I could come up with a definitive ordering, I could give them different ratings, but given how different they are stylistically, that isn't going so well. Given that, I'm going to handwave and cite "statistics" to assert that they're all more likely to be 21s than 22s and ignore the human element of this comparison so that I can just be done with this. Perhaps when I open my bottle of George T. Stagg 2019 that will be a clearer 22 and then I can use that as a basis for comparison with this. 21 for now, but it could easily end up being a 22. Right now though, I think that Elijah Craig B520 is a clearer 22. I like how much richer and darker its flavor is, though the variation on flavors here with some interesting subtlety gives this some nice life, particularly with the green bananas and wood maintaining the terrific balance. The deciding factor for me here is the harshness, which - while not bad for the proof - is noticeably stronger here than in the Elijah Craig B520. They're both excellent, but I give the nod to the Elijah Craig. For the money, it's very hard to come anywhere near this quality. Truly, an outcome that I didn't see coming. Very well done, Jack Daniel's

Rating: 12/23 I've heard that this is a great budget bourbon. In fact, I know of a very good local bar that uses it as their well spirit, so I have high hopes (I mean, not sky high, but high for a <$20 bourbon). N: Hmm, this is lighter than I'd expected. There's more mineral. There's also a kind of aged funk, savoriness, and some pepperiness, but, yeah, I do believe that this is Evan Williams. I think I might be getting a little bit of apple bordering on apricot from this, which I do rather appreciate. P: Yeah, it has this light minerality to it. There is a sort of rich maturity, but the palate is not terribly full. The complexity is adequate, but it's nothing to write home about. I get some pepperiness, which is kind an an interesting break from the pure cinnamon. I do actually worry about using it for mixing because it's a bit heavy on the minerality and not quite the usual bourbon cinnamon/cherry profile. There is a fair amount of vanilla though. The savoriness and fullness of the bonded proof here is quite beneficial to this bourbon. F: The minerality is still present, but it isn't overwhelming. I get some sweet creek water in it and there's still some richness suggesting the age. Not a great finish, but it's fine. So, I prefer Wild Turkey 101 and I wouldn't be enthusiastic about drinking this neat. I also worry a bit about using it in a mixed drink because of its minerality. It's far from a bad bourbon and the extra proof is really nice, but it isn't something I would want to buy again. It strikes me as a fair value for the money and competitive with Jim Beam Black (side note: isn't it weird that Evan Williams chose white as their more premium color when just about everyone else chooses black?). I'm looking at a 12 to 13 for this. I have no doubt that it's better than Evan Williams Black and most bourbons in the $15 range, but it also is just $5 less than Wild Turkey 101, which I enjoy a lot more. For me, the decision is clear. Having gone back and forth a bit, I'd say I prefer the complexity and balance of Jim Beam Black slightly, but I would rate this a bit above Ancient Age and Ezra Brooks. They have a 13 and an 11 (tied), respectively, so this is getting a 12. <===breaking news===> Last second update: I realized I had a sip left that had been sitting on the counter for an hour. I tasted it and it was way way better! I got less minerality, more richness, and more complexity. It had a quite good peanut brittle character to it that just isn't at all present right out of the bottle. It was at least on par with Wild Turkey 101 right out of the bottle under those circumstances. It reminded me a bit of a less spicy George Dickel Bottled In Bond (2019 release) that also lacked that Dickel vitamin flavor, so I side-by-sided them and confirmed exactly that. Choosing between the two of them is tough. I'm going to have to pour some more of this and give it some time so that I can take this evolution into consideration. This got a LOT better when the last sip was left on the counter for over an hour. Now, I've done the same with something resembling a third of a pour, but the outcome was not anywhere near what I had last time (spoilers). For comparison, I did a similar pour of Wild Turkey 101 side by side and after the hour, I found that this had not changed much and the Wild Turkey was still better (even though its quality hadn't particularly improved either). I did try this straight out of the bottle last time right after having the heavily oxidized sip out of the glass, and the difference was night and day. This time, however, the flavors are pretty similar. The flavor this time has a bit of those nice toasty flavors from last time, but it sacrifices the fullness of the spirit straight out of the bottle and it's at best a 1 point improvement. Side by side, the Dickel is leagues better. I think this might be a situation like with my bottle of Russell's Reserve Single Barrel that say nearly empty on the shelf for at least a year where heavy oxidation somehow dramatically improves the dregs of the bottle (or, in this case, glass). As disappointing as it is to say that, it's clear that pouring a dram and waiting an hour isn't sufficient to achieve that awesome (probably in the 16-18 range - it was only one sip, so it was really hard to tell) sip that I got before. If you want to pour a bunch of tiny glasses of this and wait an hour for each of them, you might be able to get a tremendous improvement, but that's an unreasonable expectation, so I can't factor it into my rating. Unfortunately, this is staying a 12.