Tastes

Tasting this neat, from a 100ml minibottle for $10 in Colorado. Nose is sweet grain floral and cotton candy. Color is golden brown, with thin legs. In the mouth, saccharine sweet flash, vanilla, then oak, spice, and ethanol bite, then licorice. Thin mouthfeel. Finish draws from licorice and dry oak into light sour and grassy rye. Ice cools it down and tamps down the sweetness, maybe adding the "blending" missing in this bourbon when sipped straight. 2-3 years seems too short for aging this wheated mashbill. It's all elbows and knees--too sweet, too spicy, too licorice/sour, etc, all at the same time. No blend no flow. If you’re looking for an easy bourbon flavor profile, this isnt it. And at Laws bourbons price-points in the $80-90 range... that's a heavy lift to justify. I feel better tossing $10 for the 100ml taster. But... it IS interesting.

Kentucky distilled whiskey finished in Napa Cabernet barrels, 5 years old, 44 ABV. Tasted neat. Light golden brown in the glass, medium coating legs. Nose is light, sweet grapes and grass. Baking spice and sweet burnt sugar show up front in the mouth, with vanilla, caramel corn, and tannic oak coming later. Lighter flavors overall, and a thin mouth feel. Finishes with some sour wine flavors, and grassy rye spice, mint, and dry oak in a medium long finish. Dry. The wine finish is there, but it doesn't dominate this whiskey--adds a nice fruit essence, but also some sour in the finish that isn't as nice. Surprised that it's this spicy for how little rye (4%) is in the mashbill, but that's ok by me--drinks like a higher rye whiskey, but softer and lighter overall in profile.

Mashbill #12, aged 6-8 years, bottled at 90 proof. Tasted neat. Color is a golden brown, with strong lingering legs on the glass. Viscous. Nose is sweet cherry fruit, brown sugar, and vanilla oak. In the mouth, tannic oak and char, burnt brown sugar over the top of fruit. Viscous mouthfeel. Spicy rye and baking spices comes through as this heads to the finish, which is long and warming (ethanol) with char smoke, grassy rye, and tanic valilla oak. Was impressed by this $23 bottle. I like it more than the 13 year old BIB Dickel at $45 that I tasted recently, and now side by side. This is sweeter, thicker, more complex all the way through to the finish, without the distinct sour flavor. I disagree with the Distiller Tasters' reviews of this and the 2008 13 y.o. that dropped in 2022. I feel like they have it backwards, but... that's the beauty of individual tastes...and maybe the benefit of the individualistic reviews that this site relies on. We all have different expectations going in, and different reactions to complex flavors on the fly. Not to mention the nostalgia-bias of a brand you drank in college in the 1970s. Such is life. So...try it yourself and make up your own mind. Heck, how wrong can you go for $23. Maybe I'm being too generous, but I think not--maybe too conservative.

Gifted this in mid-1990s, and it has spent much of its life in the back of a cool closed cabinet. Never one of my favorites, but... now to taste it again... neat. Nose is peat, iodine, saline, and malted grain. Light scent but present, and very light legs in the glass. Orange light-amber in color. In the mouth, thin mouthfeel and thin sweet cereal flavor. Not much peat or smoke, a little oak and vanilla, and some light tannins. Finish is quick, quick and saline, wirh light tannic/leather aftertaste. My memory of the 1990s was that I liked smoky peaty scotches, still do, and this was the opposite. It is good, but not challenging or overly complex. That's ok, but more like a peated Irish whiskey. And as that style of scotch whisky, it is worth sipping and enjoying it for what it is.

Tasted neat. Dark golden brown and average coating legs in the glass. Nose is light, floral grain and mineral saline. Oak, ethanol, and charcoal surround the sweet corn, dry roasted peanuts, and vanilla. Not as sweet as expected. Baking spices come on and so does a sour flavor. Light to moderate mouthfeel and then longer mint, mineral, char, and tobacco finish. With ice the bourbon flattens, but the sour char ethanol finish continues. I was really expecting a better more complex drink given the Distiller Pro rating (not seeing a cherry cola sweetness) and a 13 year age statement. Will keep tasting this and circle back, but right now, first blush, this is a disappointing 3.5 ...being generous.

JD 2022 BIB 100 proof, Batch 1, in a 700 ml bottle. Tasted neat. Nice label and familiar square bottle. Color is golden brown with a light rosy hue. Light coating legs in the glass. Nose is classic JD--corn syrup, musty grain, nutty, light floral. In the mouth, sweet and sour ethanal punch that is straw-dry. Baking spices and grassy rye and pepper blooms. Lighter mourhfeel, not really coating. Has that JD taste but ramped up with higher ABV and more oak and charcoal. Tingling mint/nettle mouthfeel in a finish that is sweet/spicy and average in strenth and length. Ice? Mixing? Will revisit those tastes soon, as well as my initial 3.75 rating. This is a really nice upgrade for JD, showing that it can make really good whiskey with more depth. The 700ml bottle is a bit of a unforced choke, but the price point at $38 is not far off. Whisky Advocate rated it 95, and #1 most interesting whisky of 2022. https://whiskyadvocate.com/Jack-Daniels-Bonded Not sure about that, but it is an interesting shift in JD's portfolio, and a positive change for sure.

2022 bottle, 90 proof single barrel sour mash, straight bourbon. Tasting neat. Color is rose brown and thin legs in the glass. Nose is baking spice and brown sugar and oatmeal. Light and floral. Spice ball in the mouth, turning sweet cereal and vanilla. Light mouthfeel and thin. Grassy, pepper, and spice, plus tart apple and sugar continue in the finish which is fairly long. Ice smooths out the spice bomb and accentuates the grain sweetness. Beautiful and round, but still thin feeling in the mouth. I was hoping for more oily depth and oak in this single barrel. But the price at $38 makes this a deal. Will keep tasting and add to this review.