Tastes

(From the archives) 17: This has quite a remarkable flavor! The richness of the orange really comes through in a way that it doesn't in Cointreau, helping to balance the sweetness. There are some mild spice flavors in it too that are very interesting. It lands somewhere in between Cointreau and Grand Marnier, so a 50/50 mix of them would probabaly be a good substitute. Grand Marnier is definitely richer with more of a wood presence and more of something bitter from the distillate. Grand Marnier is better at first sip, but its fruit isn't as delightful and its balance doesn't hold up as well. I think they're fairly comparable in quality though. I would really like to try a somewhat richer and substantially less sweet version of this curacao.

Rating: 17/23 N: There's a sweet orange scent, like candy, and also some ethanol. It's a very pure ethanol flavor though, without any overbearing heads or tails. It's kind of zippy and uncomplex. This nose is lighter than that of either Grand Marnier or Pierre Ferrand Dry Curacao. P: There are three flavors here: sweet, orange, and vodka. The sweetness and orange produce a pure, candy-like flavor that is tasty despite being one-note. There is a little bit of oiliness from the orange, but I wouldn't say there's much. The alcohol is unpleasant if drinking Cointreau neat, but it vanishes in a mixed drink, just making it seem a bit stronger. Additionally, in the alcohol's defense, it pretty much just tastes like pure ethanol. It's clear that a decently high quality vodka was used to produce this, so the alcohol interfere's minimally. It's only so noticeable because there is so little else going on and the palate is otherwise light. F: This is not as nice as the palate. Some of the grain starts coming out briefly, but then it brings in some harshness and eventually a faint hint of artificial sweetener. Of what I consider to be the "Big Three" orange liqueurs (Cointreau, Grand Marnier, and Pierre Ferrand Dry Curacao), this is both the simplest and the most pure in it candy orange sweetness. This bodes well for its capability as a mixer since its flavor can definitely shine through. Usually, though, such one-note mixers cost a lot less. Also, having done several comparisons with margaritas, mai tais, and variations on them (e.g. margarita but with high rye whiskey), I've found that this only beats Pierre Ferrand about half of the time. For sipping neat, Pierre Ferrand shows more complexity with bitter and oil notes, along with a hint of cognac, but it suffers from the clear presence of young brandy that borders on vodka. On the other hand, Cointreau pretends to be nothing other than vodka with orange and sugar, so maybe that works to its benefit? I think I would probably prefer Pierre Ferrand neat, but I bet that mixing it in with some cognac would do it a world of good. I guess I should try that... Grand Marnier is a different beast. It more prominently shows off its cognac, but its orange suffers as a result, developing more of a citrus bite. I'd say that Grand Marnier and Cointreau are on opposite sides of the spectrum with Pierre Ferrand in the middle and off to the side slightly. If I were picking two for my home bar, I would either take Cointreau and Grand Marnier because they are the most different or Pierre Ferrand and Grand Marnier because Pierre Ferrand works as a substitute for Cointreau in most situations. All of this considered, I think that Cointreau is my least favorite, but I can understand why some would prefer it the most and I can definitely understand why Grand Marnier often comes out on the bottom. I'm in the 16 to 18 range on this and it's pretty tough to make the call. At the end of the day, I have to conclude that while this is really more of a 13 to 16 for sipping (I'm leaning toward 15, just below Pierre Ferrand), it's great in cocktails, often functioning better than either Grand Marnier or Pierre Ferrand due to it's starker flavor profile. I hate to say this, but they are all very versatile in cocktails and provide a tremendous increase in quality to many of them. For mixing, there is no clear winner in my mind, so they're all going to get a score of 18. I will personally probably be sticking to Pierre Ferrand with an occasional Grand Marnier supplement going forward though, if for no other reason than price. But last second plot twist! Roll in the post-credits scene here. I was disappointed by the outcome of my head-to-head-to-head, so I took one more stab at it and came out with a compelling result! Now, all of them are still very good and I found that each pretty consistently enhanced the cocktail I mixed it in. That said, I do think I've identified a winner and a loser this time. So I tried cocktails based on gin and tequila, with an emphasis on margaritas because, obviously. I didn't have the proper ingredients to make anything rum-based, so I skipped it and that might influence future ratings. I found this time that Cointreau decidedly trailed the other two. It added some more orange presence for sure, but it was just so simple. I did make stronger cocktails this time around, but it wasn't exactly a thimbleful of lime juice dumped into a vat of tequila. This time, Cointreau was consistently second or third and Pierre Ferrand was consistently first or second. There was one exception in which Cointreau was close to Pierre Ferrand for first (in a margarita with an anejo tequila, in case that matters), but that was the best that it did. Grand Marnier continued to be the most volatile, so it is definitely the riskiest choice when mixing a drink (though if anything I suspect it would be less risky in a rum-based cocktail). It tasted pretty good consistently though and Cointreau never quite achieved the complexity and balance of Pierre Ferrand. Considering this experience, I would have to say that Pierre Ferrand and Grand Marnier rival each other based on context and personal preference (do you want that pure tequila flavor to show through?), but Pierre Ferrand is a much safer option. It is still the easiest one to drown in a weak cocktail, but I frankly don't want to drink something watered down with margarita mix anyway. Considering all of this, I think that Pierre Ferrand wins for quality and consistency. It would be my first choice, Grand Marnier my second, and Cointreau my third. They are all still pretty close though. I'm going 19, 18, and 17, respectively.

Rating: 18/23 N: There's a biting citrus like when you first cut into an orange. It's backed by sweetness and some richness from the cognac. There's a hint of spice and perhaps no more than the faintest hint of alcohol, but it's hard to get much more out because the orange is so piercing. P: The citrus bite hits me immediately. Keeping in mind that experience of cutting into an orange, the reminds me somewhat of eating a slice with the peel still attached, though somewhat less numbing and oily. There is a numbing spiciness to this though and the orange's sweetness is supported by the dried fruits from the cognac (mainly raisin, but also a hint of dark cherry and just maybe sultana). There's a brown sugar tint to the caramel and possibly some additional spices that are hard to grasp. This has a less pure orange flavor than either Cointreau or Pierre Ferrand Dry Curacao does. Whereas Cointreau has an orange candy flavor and Pierre Ferrand nails the bitter, oily orange peel flavor, this just has a citrusy note that is kind of like orange, but also kind of like other citrus. It could have some lemon and perhaps even lime mixed in, but it mostly just tastes like lackluster orange. Admittedly, it's the most realistic orange experience of the three, but it's a tad off-putting since this is nominally an orange liqueur (and to be clear, it still does mostly taste like orange). Partially, it's just lacking sugar, but the underlying orange is not as good as what Pierre Ferrand has either. I definitely get plenty of sweetness along with it, though not to the same extent as in Cointreau. The cognac is certainly present as well, though its particular flavors aren't terribly distinct and it doesn't taste terribly mature either. It's a richer and more syrupy liqueur than Cointreau is. F: The orange and some generic brandy flavors stay, along with a little bit of zesty spice. The sweetness becomes a bit more bitter, but the viscosity stays. I prefer the palate, but this is totally fine. This is a more complex liqueur than Cointreau is by far and I would argue that it is also more balanced. The raw alcohol stands out less in this than in either Cointreau or Pierre Ferrand Dry Curacao (which I consider to be the other two big players in the orange liqueur market) I can actually imagine myself sitting and sipping this neat. The cognac itself doesn't taste all that interesting, but liqueurs are kind of like cocktails in that they can disguise underwhelming spirits. The flip side though is that the citrus is less obviously orange than just some general citrus and the complexity muddles it slightly with the other flavors that are present (the spirit and the wood). As a result, its high notes are not as high as the Cointreau orange candy and whether they meet the level of the Pierre Ferrand oily bitter young orange spirit is open to debate (also, seasonality, as Grand Marnier has more of a winter presence). If I'm drinking something neat, I'll take this over Cointreau or Pierre Ferrand. Their underlying alcohol comes out more and they taste less mature and enjoyable to contemplate. They're all pretty easy to just sip for their sweetness though. For mixing, it's more complicated. After testing numerous cocktails with all sorts of variations, I was unable to determine a clear winner. Each of these had cocktails and particular variants of them in which it excelled and none of them was ever plain bad. Cointreau was probably the least offensive, whereas Grand Marnier was more likely to clash a bit. At the end of the day, while Grand Marnier is a 16 to 18 (probably a 17) for sipping neat, it's tied with the other two at 18 for mixing. It's a total anti-climax, but they're all getting an 18 because there are so many cocktails that they are so good in. If I just had to pick one, it would be tough to choose, but I'd likely pick Pierre Ferrand just for the value for the money. If I already had one that was not Grand Marnier, Grand Marnier would be my second choice because it is so different and more enjoyable to sip. Roll in the post-credits scene here though. I was disappointed by the outcome of my head-to-head-to-head, so I took one more stab at it and came out with a compelling result! Now, all of them are still very good and I found that each pretty consistently enhanced the cocktail I mixed it in. That said, I do think I've identified a winner and a loser this time. So I tried cocktails based on gin and tequila, with an emphasis on margaritas because, obviously. I didn't have the proper ingredients to make anything rum-based, so I skipped it and that might influence future ratings. I found this time that Cointreau decidedly trailed the other two. It added some more orange presence for sure, but it was just so simple. I did make stronger cocktails this time around, but it wasn't exactly a thimbleful of lime juice dumped into a vat of tequila. This time, Cointreau was consistently second or third and Pierre Ferrand was consistently first or second. There was one exception in which Cointreau was close to Pierre Ferrand for first (in a margarita with an anejo tequila, in case that matters), but that was the best that it did. Grand Marnier continued to be the most volatile, so it is definitely the riskiest choice when mixing a drink (though if anything I suspect it would be less risky in a rum-based cocktail). It tasted pretty good consistently though and Cointreau never quite achieved the complexity and balance of Pierre Ferrand. Considering this experience, I would have to say that Pierre Ferrand and Grand Marnier rival each other based on context and personal preference (do you want that pure tequila flavor to show through?), but Pierre Ferrand is a much safer option. It is still the easiest one to drown in a weak cocktail, but I frankly don't want to drink something watered down with margarita mix anyway. Considering all of this, I think that Pierre Ferrand wins for quality and consistency. It would be my first choice, Grand Marnier my second, and Cointreau my third. They are all still pretty close though. I'm going 19, 18, and 17, respectively.

(Tasting from the archives) 19: Depending on the state of your palate, this is either Brandy that is a bit on the sweet side and has a nice orange flavor or a triple sec with Brandy subtleties. In prepared to believe that the Brandy is Cognac and enjoy that balance with the orange. There is a lot of depth here and while the drink may not balance as well as Cointreau does, it has enough depth to liven up any drink that it does not destroy. The texture is slightly syrupy, but is not distractingly so. In comparison, Cointreau tastes like Sunkist. On net, the balance is very good.

Rating: 19/23 No idea what to expect here. N: There's a minty spiciness with anise, as well as some richer, more savory herbs, some earth, straw, wood, and a hint of citrus. It smells good with an intriguing, ever-changing profile. Definitely though, it smells like something that some people will not enjoy and it smells quite situational. P: The palate has a big vibrancy yet doesn't taste super rich. There's a bit of prickliness and herbaceousness that remind me a little of a high rye rye like WhistlePig. The particular herbal profile reminds me of Jagermeister, but with more distinct flavors, less sugary viscosity, and none of that metallic cola flavor. There's a bit of that Jagermeister Cold Brew spiciness in this, but not the roastiness. The complexity here is really surprising and enjoyable, particularly since the flavors just go together so nicely. It masks its alcohol pretty well too. I figured it was probably 30 to 40 percent alcohol, but I checked the back and it's 55! The actual flavors include a big kick of black, white, and even rainbow peppercorns. played against a viscous sweetness with an herbal backing. The mint, anise, and citrus come through, though not nearly so much as the pepper. There's some sort of bitter herb flavor hanging out in the back that I'm having trouble placing, but I definitely get some piney rosemary in here and maybe a little bit of thyme as well. There is unfortunately a bit of something a little off with the alcohol flavor coming through that causes me to not love this. F: The pepperiness and light herbaceousness persist while the alcohol and viscous sweetness subside. It's a light, fresh finish that sticks around for a while and is enjoyable to contemplate while also being more balanced than the palate (albeit less complex). This strikes me as the herbal counterpoint to St. Germain - it's elegant and very complex with a particular genre of flavors being targeted (specifically floral/fruity and spicy/herbal as opposed to being limited to chocolate or a spattering of fruits and spices and nuts and caramel and ...) and it doesn't reveal much alcohol either. This isn't just something that I could drink - it's something that I'd be happy to drink. It's a shame it's so expensive, but not much is necessary at once, so I think this bottle will last me a while. I'm not sure I have any reason to restock Jagermeister when I run out now that I have Chartreuse Green (not that I really did anything with Jagermeister to begin with), even though they aren't quite perfect substitutes. I'm looking forward to trying this out in various cocktails and maybe just enjoying a small pour now and then. I need to actually rate this though. I started off with a 16, which I probably should have posted as a separate tasting, but I was too lazy. That seems low now though. This strikes me as better than any of the orange liqueurs I've tried as a sipper (though less likely to achieve universal appeal) and I'm not really sure what to put it in (I mean, I only know of like 2 cocktails). That said, it doesn't seem at all bad mixed in with some gin or tequila, but it needs to be moderated, so it won't be the main flavor there. The flavors here do get muddled fairly quickly, whereas they hold up better St. Germain when it is mixed and with a palate that is not in perfect shape. Considering that, I think St. Germain is the better of the two. Its flavor also holds up well in a drink and both are best suited for refreshing drinks with comparatively low ABVs where the complexity of the spirit is more in play, so I don't think that the St. Germain's lower ABV hurts its relative value for the money a lot. A couple of things I tried that should serve as good yardsticks for cocktails are this with vodka and this with gin. The particular vodka (Beluga Noble) is a bit milky/oaty sweet with a harshess to it. It worked well, taming this a bit, while adding a new element. The cheap gin (Dover Strait) also gave the Chartreuse an interesting new personality with its stark juniper flavor and clean presence. I wouldn't say that either was necessarily better than plain Chartreuse Green, but they at least helped to stretch the bottle and are promising for actual cocktails involving Chartreuse. I've even tried mixing it with bourbon and found that the result was about as good as the neat Chartreause and possibly better. It's like sugar plus slightly bitter herbal stuff, so that makes sense. I think with a bit more effort I'll find something that really clicks here, but, regardless, there is a lot of potential for Chartreuse in cocktails. I think that Chartreuse tastes at least as good as Grand Marnier does neat (and really I think it's better). I can therefore sort of imagine going as low as a 17 for this, but really I think that 18 is more the bottom. I don't see it going as high as 21 though, so 18 to 20 is the most realistic range and either 19 or 20 really does seem right. 19 it is for now, but I can definitely imagine this moving up to a 20 in the future. Here's where I'm going to do something really unusual. I have not found that excellent cocktail that definitively moves this up to a 20 yet, but because I have found so many that are about as good as this is neat, I'm going to make an assertion: because Chartreuse Green neat is on the borderline between 19 and 20, at least one of those cocktails is most likely enough better than neat Chartreuse to bump it into the 20 range, and if none is good enough, I'm sure that one is out there and not incredibly hard to find. Think of this as a loan, Chartreuse. I may take it back and bump you down to a 19 at any time.

Rating: 21/23 The bottle is incredibly unique. The ornate shape and colors combined with the odd contents make me think that someone unearthing this in 50 years would grimace and say "they had terrible tastes back in the day." N: Floral, fruity, sweet, and slightly tart. No alcohol, but the sweetness isn't sickly either. I get lychee and a bit of lemon, but I know there's more there. It's enticing and refreshing, and it draws me in. I could nose this for ages. There's honey in there as well - how did I miss that at first? I'm sure that this smells very much like elderflower, but I'm not sure what elderflower actually smells like. It's a fantastic nose. P: Tart, but sweet. Floral (some rose water, but not entirely), honey, the faintest vanilla, lychee, lemon. Nothing artificial and no sense that sugar was just dumped into this. There's maybe some nuttiness like toasted almond mixed with walnut, but not much. A bit of melon too and perhaps a tiny bit of grape jelly. No alcohol either. It's fantastically refreshing and incredibly complex. Viscous and sugary, but not as much as I remembered. F: The floral and fruity flavors linger for ages with the tartness grounding everything so that it isn't sickly sweet. The palate is better, but this is a finish that I could savor for ages. It's terrific. So, this is super viscous and sweet. It's kind of too much to drink on its own, but it goes great with some sparkling water. Add a little gin in there and you've got yourself a tasty and refreshing summer cocktail. Liqueurs can be hard to rate because I need to assess them both in terms of mixing and neat, whereas for most spirits I just rate them neat. In this case, neat is simultaneously out the window, but also sort of reduces to the mixed case. What do I mean by this? I mean that this isn't like many liqueurs that are used to add a flourish or fill out well-established cocktails (e.g. how orange liqueur fills out a margarita, but is not a dominant flavor). In this case, the liqueur is best playing a dominant role with a light spirit pairing with it and increasing its proof. I'm sure that there are some fruity cocktails that this enhances, but I don't have a whole canonical list in front of me, so from experimentation I've found that this works with variations on soda and light spirits. Yeah, I've seen some recipes for things like punches with lots of fruit juice and a little bit of St. Germain, but it's fantastic enough in the cocktails I've tried that I don't feel a need to try all of those to rate it. So the complexity, balance, and quality of the flavors are all top notch. This is an awesome liqueur, particularly now that I've figured out what to do with it. mixed into a toned-down state so that it is sippable without being overwhelming (e..g mixed with water), this is a big step up over the likes of Grand Marnier and Pierre Ferrand Dry Curacao. It's hard to find other liqueurs to compare with this. Therefore, I'm sort of arbitrarily slotting this into the 21 bucket. Amazing! It could be as low as a 19, but I can't see it going below that. Really, I think it's at least a 20. I can imagine a 22 as well, but when I sip it I think "this is amazing, but I'd get sick of it if I tried to sip it all day", so it isn't a 23.

18: Elderflower liqueur seems oddly specific, but it pairs well with orange liqueur (e.g. Cointreau) and pretty much any column-distilled spirit (bourbon being the obvious exception) or Blanco tequila. On its own, St. Germain is not generally sippable, but the character of its flavor is clear. Mixed with other liquors, it has a delightfully fruity depth that makes any cocktail refreshing and summery.

Rating: 15/23 N: Mint that's really closer to straight menthol mixes with some rich, mellow, herbal flavor and a balanced sweetness that has a faint suggestion of caramel, kind of like cola, but without that oppressive Jagermeister metallic quality. P: It's less immediately minty than I'd expected, with bitter, herbal richness leading over a light layer of cola. Then, mint and spiciness come out. As it progresses, I get bittersweet chocolate and medium roast coffee. At points, I get hints of a rich, bitter (but not tart), juicy, dark fruitiness. It's a much more balanced profile than I'd recalled. I gradually start to notice a bit of spices (largely cinnamon). The complexity is decent, but for better or for worse the individual flavors generally don't stand out too much, aside from the mint and maybe one element of the bitter profile. F: The mint lasts for ages and it overlays a bitterness that increasingly reminds me of dark roast coffee with some chocolate. It's a pretty uninteresting finish, but it's reasonably tasty. I'm surprised by how much more I like this now than I did before. It's not amazing, but aside from perhaps being a bit too minty, the profile is good. I think that the flavors are a bit too subtle as well to the point that they get muddled, but I can sit here and enjoy contemplating this just fine. I haven't actually tried this in a cocktail (all I had was a sample) and I do worry that it may not be that effective as a mixer because - aside from its mintiness, which would be a problem in many cocktails - it is more subtle and subdued than, say, Campari is. It seems like some sort of bitters might be better in many cocktails. Putting this all together, I'm looking at a 14 to 17 based just on sipping. I think right now I'm going with 15, but a 16 would be possible in the future for sure.

Rating: 14/23 N: It smells bitter. Like amaro, but on the fruity side. It definitely has that bitter mintiness that makes me think of Fernet Branca though. It's kind of that plus some sort of tart but sweet and full red fruit and citrus. I felt like it was more complex when I first tasted it, but I guess that's all I've managed to pick out here. From a distance, the complex herbaceousness of Fernet Branca wafts out, but honestly, I can't quite put my finger on the particular notes. P: Viscous with a sugary note up front, but immediately the intense bitterness asserts itself with a lot of mint and some other herbal characteristics. Some fruit comes trough to try to explain the sweetness, but it doesn't entirely succeed. I definitely get grapefruit zest, but I also get some less pronounced red fruit flavor (probably cherry). It isn't bad, but it is very opinionated and isn't terribly complex (though it certainly isn't entirely just bitter and fruit). It does make me think of Fernet Branca with some fruit and sugar added, to be sure. The menthol character of the mint is far reduced here and the strong bitterness is played up though. I think that this palate has more going on and I enjoy it more, but I can't say for sure that I think it is more balanced. I appreciate that there isn't alcohol showing through here, but I guess with all of the flavor here, that would be pretty hard to have happen. I think I might be tasting the red dye though and that's pretty hard to look past. It's sort of a bitter, oily, lightly chemical and meaty flavor if that makes any sense? F: That bitterness sure lingers and it even starts developing a faint skunkiness. The fruit stays to some extent, but the bitterness is most dominant and the sugar recedes until it tastes more plausibly like a part of the fruit flavor. It's an acceptable finish, though I do still get some red dye flavor. Overall, I guess this serves a purpose. It isn't something I enjoy on its own and it is also kind of challenging in a drink, but I certainly don't hate it and I definitely could drink it on its own (though I wouldn't love to do that). This has that classic amaro bitterness that is the pillar supporting Fernet Branca, but it adds in some fruit. I just don't think it does an excellent job at that. While Campari is more complex on the nose, Fernet Branca is more complex on the palate and has a nice subtlety as well, so I can kind of see myself drinking Fernet Branca neat (in small amounts). Campari just kind of has a couple of flavors that it shouts: bitter and fruit. That's sort of good for mixing, but really what I want is to have two separate liqueurs so that I can control the ratio of fruit to bitterness. That's kind of what rosso vermouth does when paired with this, but it's sure an awkward and indirect approach. I'd be interested to see what could be accomplished by mixing Fernet Branca and Luxardo instead. It's at least a 12 for sure. I appreciate all of the flavor here and I guess that it does have its place. A 16 seems like the limit for this one given its strong bitterness and lack of complexity, but that's really pushing it. This does at least consistently seem like it is satisfying its basic duty as an amaro though. The problem I've really come up against here is that this is neither a liqueur like Chartreuse Green that is subtle and enjoyable right out of the bottle nor a one-note liqueur like Cointreau that adds just a nice little enhancement to many cocktails. There are just a few cocktails that use this and while I do enjoy a good boulevardier, I always find myself wishing that I could tweak the Campari flavor. I almost decided to go with a 13 and then I almost decided to go with a 15 I ultimately landed on a 14 because of its the tension between its red dye flavor and its deserved place in a small number of cocktails, most notably the boulevardier. It seems far from perfect or irreplaceable, but it works. This is certainly a challenging liqueur.