Tastes

A really fascinating find. For background, see Lee Stang's article in Bourbon & Banter, https://www.bourbonbanter.com/drink/drink-reviews/bourbon-reviews/ragged-branch-distillery-is-coming-of-age/. Pretty amazing result for a distillery that started in 2014! The picture in Distiller doesn't match the bottle I have, exactly, so to clarify, I'm tasting Ragged Branch Signature Bourbon, Virginia Straight Bourbon Whiskey, Batch 4, Bottle 376, 90 proof, 750ml. (Note Lee Stang's review was from Batch 5.) The Virginia ABC web site says the mash bill is 66 percent corn, 17 percent rye and 17 percent malted barley. There's no age statement but I believe this is a 4-year bourbon. Glassware: "Stave & Thief" Glencairn. On the nose (neat) there's very little, and I found that fascinating. I finally discerned something between graham crackers and malted milk balls (other than the perpetual vanilla and caramel bouquet in every bourbon). On entry, lots of front-of-mouth flavor and pleasant mouth feel. I prefer wheated bourbons, so I am sensitive to rye but this was not very spicy. Again with that mysterious hybrid of graham crackers and malted milk balls! The finish was equally smooth and pleasant, with an almost-sweet aftertaste. With a little room-temperature water, the bouquet opened up to a degree I've not experienced before, much more aroma on the nose than when sampled neat. That same mix of flavors was there as well as another that I couldn't identify. On the tongue, entry to finish, the same as before but enhanced. Then I remembered Lee Stang's reviews of this and other Ragged Branch bottlings where he mentioned "chocolate" and "malted milk balls" several times. I realized I'm tasting nougat, like from the center of a Three Musketeers candy bar! Definitely different from other bourbons. This is a really satisfying bourbon and I recommend it highly.

Smooth and well-balanced, smoky on entry, sweet at mid-palate, and -- as the label promises -- a very, very long finish. All of it tasty.

On the nose: flat cola and hints of citrus (in addition to the always present caramel and vanilla). On the tongue: one of the smoothest starts, tastes of cola and caramel, and so smooth it leaves through the back room without bothering anyone else. I can see why so many reviews say this is so easy to drink neat; I agree. When I added a little water I noticed the oat. As others noted, this is a pricey bourbon. I'd buy it for the novelty and drinkability, but not for the drinkability alone. Without regard for the retail price, this is a really nice bourbon. Good job, Woodford team!

The usual aromas plus something musty like dried fruit. On the tongue, woodiness but not oak, not pine, something citrus, maybe lemongrass. Smooth start, even smoother finish. With a little water: sweet, fruity and the usual vanilla and caramel. A good basic bourbon. $18/375ml at Clifton 1st Liquor Shop in Louisville KY, purchased for Bourbon Steward exam prep.

Something citrus-y, maybe slightly fruity on the nose. Caramel and butterscotch on the tongue. Smooth start, warm finish. With a little water, nothing new to add (but I fear I overloaded my taster by taking a third neat taste, however tiny). A very good-to-great choice as a neat bourbon, and I'm confident it would perform well in cocktails, too. 375ml, $20, bought at Clifton 1st Liquor Shop, Louisville KY, in preparation for my Bourbon Steward exam. Opened and tasted in Raleigh NC 2019-09-24. Glassware: Glencairn Canadian.

This is a tasting from a 100ml sample in a Heaven Hill taster pack (approx $7, thus $50 for 750ml). First hits are citrus, seems like orange. The bouquet is laid back, nothing really jumps out. On the tongue the usual vanilla and caramel, but also molasses and a little nutty. Slightly sweet. Mouth feel is smooth, almost seems less than the 92 proof stated on the label. Hotter on the finish than the beginning. Added a little water and that opened up the nutty flavor.

Odd, but I think this is the first time I've smelled something off-putting, and I smelled it twice, some ester I can't describe. I also smelled something fruity and spicy, maybe cinnamon or clove? (Maybe that "unknown" two sentences ago was clove?) On the tongue this is smooth, a little fire. Definitely sweet: a honey-sweetness is the most obvious flavor on the front and the finish. With a little water, the sweetness is reined in and now I taste other spices, probably nutmeg, and some fruity flavors like banana or raisins. There's a consistent mustiness all through this tasting. The finish is slightly hot but very low-key. I'd score this higher except for the surprise scent at the beginning.

I tasted this as part of my Bourbon Steward certification exam. Below are my (mostly unedited) notes from that tasting: Evan Williams Single Barrel Vintage (Barrel #677, barreled 2011-08-04, bottled 2019-04-30) Evan Williams Single Barrel Vintage (Barrel #678, barreled 2011-08-04, bottled 2019-04-30) Evan Williams Single Barrel Vintage from a Heaven Hill taster pack (unknown barrel, unknown barrel date, unknown bottle date) While shopping for samples for this exam, I was in the local Wake County ABC store (Raleigh NC) where they have lighted shelves for the bourbon section, and I asked myself, "Why is this bottle of Evan Wiliams lighter than that bottle?" When I realized they were drawn on the same day from different barrels, I was immediately curious to see how the two bottlings would compare to each other, as well as how they would compare to the 100ml sample from a Heaven Hill taster pack I found in Chattanooga TN the week before! Barrel 677 and 678 were barreled 2011-08-04 and bottled 2019-04-30, aged 7 years and 9 months. The taster pack sample is assumed to have been aged a similar amount of time. The label claims 86.6 proof, but I sensed some variation (see below). On the nose: caramel, indistinct fruit, perhaps cocoa? 678 seems bolder. The taster pack sample from the unknown barrel seems blander than 678 but stronger than 677. On the tongue: 677 has buttery feel, and tastes of caramel and toffee. 678 not as buttery, but has similar flavors and seems like it is higher proof. (A quick comparison of legs in these Glencairn whiskey tasting glasses seems to indicate less leg with 677 than 678 and the unknown barrel.) Unknown barrel seems to taste of salted peanuts, maybe? Seems the fieriest of the three. Returning to 677, it's definitely the tamest of the three. On the eyes: Barrel 678 is visually slightly darker in color. It and the unknown barrel appear to have more leg and are definitely higher proof than 677. On the tongue with filtered water added to each: 677 is really laid back. Now I taste the expected vanilla in addition to caramel. I can't pick out individual fruit flavors but it's generally in the background, along with salted peanuts again. 678 is definitely higher proof; with the same amount of water added, it seems to be stronger than 677 before I added water to it. It's similar for the unknown barrel, but it seems to have a proof lower than 678 but higher than 677 (I retract my earlier "fieriest of the three" comment). Now I'm tasting a some citrus, chiefly lemon, on the mid-tongue as I swirl 678. Summary: As expected, although all three are labeled identically, there are differences, mostly subtle. The usual bouquet and flavors are there: caramel, vanilla and indistinct fruitiness. 677 has elusive hints of cocoa or chocolate but hard to pin down. 678 is bolder, with stronger and more-varied flavors, especially some citrus-y notes like lemon. The taster pack sample from an unknown barrel and date seems to mimic 678 much more than 677. And lastly, Barrel 678 seems to be higher proof than Barrel 677, with the unknown barrel somewhere between them (but closer in proof to 678). As I expected, this tasting shows that all three are mostly similar in taste but subtle differences exist. The obvious difference in proof was a surprise, but in hindsight I should have expected it. If I had to choose among the three the next time I bought a bottle a bottle of Evan Wiliams Single Barrel Select, I'd hope for something most like Barrel 678.

375ml, 90 proof. On the nose the usual vanilla and oak and a little leather but also something strikingly fruity, maybe cherries? Whatever it is, it's elusive, hard to detect on the second and third nose, but returning again on the fourth! On the palate -- oh my! -- lots of flavor: vanilla and oak again, but also caramel and something sweet, maybe brown sugar? Plenty of other lesser flavors but I'm not experienced enough to identify them all. Some fire but generally very smooth forward and again on the finish. A pause, then adding a little water brings out those elusive lesser flavors, but I still struggled to name them. Then I re-read the expert review by Amanda Schuster and I realized I was tasting banana and chocolate! There's more but I'm still learning (working on my Bourbon Steward cert). Really pleasant results. Excellent value.