Tastes

Rating: 16/23 I'm not sure what's in this, but based on the name I'm guessing there are 6 botanicals. Oh, now I see it says "6 unique Japanese botanicals" and has a big "6". The bottle is pretty yet functional with a squat hexagon shape that makes it fit in tightly with others and a screw-top lid. N: The nose is interesting, showing that you can make a complex gin with very many or very few botanicals (at least if there are only the 6 Japanese botanicals and not others). It doesn't have scents quite like I've found before in a gin. There's lemon zestiness, but it's a bit briny and bitter or something. I might just be smelling this because it's a Japanese gin, but I think I get some yuzu. There's something floral that isn't fruity. It's definitely like corriander, but it has a bit of a more bitter, light woody aroma to it too, perhaps a bit like tea. The nose on the whole reminds me a bit of a tarter, less rich Monkey 47. Between the two, I'd say that Monkey has the better nose, but this is interesting and enjoyable. P: The flavors from the nose come out immediately. I definitely get some saltiness in here with a little bit of something else that leads me to believe that I was right in assessing the lemon zest as yuzu (though it could just be interference from the corriander). The corriander is nice and I do get some of that tea flavor as well as a bit more floral flavor than the nose suggested. It's a bit more of a black tea than the chamomile that I get from Monkey 47. There's some prickly white pepper in here too. F: The finish is much like the palate, but softer and longer. The pepper lingers for a surprisingly long time and the floral flavor peaks off and on into the finish. It's nice, though not as nice as I'd say the nose and palate are. All in all, this is a very good gin. I'd be more than happy to sit and drink it and it compares quite favorably with the likes of Tenqueray No Ten (I'd say that this is a hair better). Monkey 47 is at least 2 points better and could be as many as 4 or even 5, but for the price difference, it may not be worth the cost. Nolet's is similar in price with a slightly higher proof and a bolder but less balanced flavor. I'd take Nolet's slightly between the two, but they're fairly close. And now I've looked at the back and seen that the 6 Japanese botanicals that it contains (in addition to traditional botanicals) are listed there. I certainly didn't guess that there would be sakura in this since I would have expected that to be aggravatingly purfumey and I have no idea how sansho pepper differs from white pepper, but the tea definitely comes through and the yuzu was spot on.

Rating: 16/23 This is interesting and fairly tasty. It has the usual floral fruitiness and juniper with quite a bit of spiciness, meeting it taste like a gin somewhere between Tanqueray and Nolet's. It's less aggressively bold than Tanqueray, possibly making it inferior for mixing, but it comes across as a bit more refined. Nolet's is sweeter with far more of a sickly fruity flavor (though this still has some). Overall, this is fairly tasty and balanced with not an excessive amount of and these, but also with less boldness and richness than I'd really like (at least for a mixer). In more recent comparison with regular Tanqueray, this has less rich fruitiness to its character, but a smoother cleaner flavor. The palate does have a fair amount of alcohol and a spicy kick with a strong juniper presence and citrus. There's a dash of sweetness but not a tremendous amount. It's actually quite harsh and spicy with a lot of bitterness. There's a fair amount of herbal flavor too. Huh, this time I'm not impressed. Latest tasting brings out more of the fruity sweetness and has less harshness. I probabaly shouldn't have had it right after sweet vermouth, so I don't think that last tasting is very accurate. The flavor is more crisp and fruity than that of Ford's, but it's also less rich and rounded. I like the more savory notes of Ford's, but it lacks the juiciness of orange and light grapefruit that this has. The herbal flavors come out more this time and the harshness is subdued significantly. I'm not actually sure if this or Ford's is harsher, so I'll need to compare again another time. I'm now leaning 15ish on this, but could go higher. It's a great gin, though I've definitely gone front thinking it was far better than Ford's to putting them on the same level (that's more of a credit to Ford's though). The palate is appropriately sweet and surprsingly floral following regular Tanqueray. It has a clean flavor with some nice citrus but also the usual pine and peppery prickling. It's smooth and elegant with a nice balance of flavors. Regular Tanqueray is more herbal and earthy. I'm inclined to say that this is a tad better, but it's tough to really make a call here since they're so different. There are still good amounts of herbal flavors and spice here though, as well as plenty of juniper. It's more elegant than Nolet's, but less rich and interesting. Compared with Beefeater, it has more presence to its body, but the citrus, pepper, and juniper stick out less. It actually tastes more like a refined juniper than like a refined Tanqueray. Or maybe it tastes a bit like a hybrid of Beefeater with a little bit of Tanqueray influence and some mellowing? Regardless, I like it a lot better than Beefeater and a bit better than regular Tanqueray as well. This is some fine gin - I'm thinking a 16, but it could be higher. Possibly as low as a 15, but it's hard to imagine it going below that. Nolet's is a lot edgier, with more of an opinion about gins being floral and sweet. It's also brasher though. Nolet's is richer but also has less balance and complexity. I can see these two going tow-to-toe with no clear winner. Comparing with Ford's, which I initially thought was inferior and then decided was better, this is more floral, but perhaps less complex. Ford's actually strikes me stylistically as sitting somewhere between Tanqueray and Tanqueray No Ten. I'm having trouble deciding which of the two is better right now.

Rating: 14/23 I get big juniper and citrus (particularly lemon) flavors. It's decently oily and rich, but it's largely spicy which brings in a sense of harshness. It's cleaner than Bombay Sapphire, but less interesting and rich than Tanqueray. I'd be OK with this, but I wouldn't want to drink it neat. It's totally acceptable as a mixer though. I'd say it's comparable in quality to Regent. I'll have to get a bottle of regent as my mixer next time and do a side-by-side with the two.

Rating: 15/23 It's smoother, oilier, and richer than Beefeater. All around, I'd say it's better. It's more earthy and complex. It really isn't at all fruity, so Tanqueray No Ten might be a better option for anyone looking for some nice citrus. It's just a very nice gin that can be sipped or mixed. (Note: this tasting is from a mini bottle that's who even knows how old, so the recipe might have changed or the fact that something like 20% of the liquid had already evaporated could be to blame. Still, the balance and flavor profile are really nice.) Of the big three gins, this would be my go-to. It has better flavors than Bombay Sapphire and likes the harshness of Beefeater while also having this swirling complexity that is interesting to contemplate. So a solid choice as a mixer or a sipper.

Rating: 10/23 I probably over-penalized this for its sulfur and rubber notes in my previous tasting. The richness is nice and there is plenty of juniper. There is actually an interesting savory character to it, but the sulfur is most certainly still there. It's quite earthy, which might appeal to some, but not to me. This is not something that I would want to have an entire bottle of. It's less herbal, citric, and sweet than Tanqueray is, but perhaps it's also less harsh. Between the two, I would definitely go for the Tanqueray, which has a much more appealing profile in my opinion by a substantial margin. Beefeater also has a cleaner, albeit blander, profile. Of the three, I'd go for Tanqueray first, then Beefeater, then Bombay Sapphire. Sadly, this just isn't all that good.