Tastes

This is in the sherry-finish division of my finished bourbon bracket. It was Joseph Magnus vs Noble Oak, winner to go against Wild Turkey Revival. In a blind taste test, Joseph Magnus won. As always... this is for science. Blind was kind of impossible. Although price doesn’t always mean better, $90 vs $30 was meaningful here. I wasn’t fooled for a second. Nose contains sugar and caramel. Reminds me a lot of barrel strength bourbons. Body is where the sherry influence kicks in. There’s a bit of sugar and leather in there, and the feel is overwhelmingly dry. On the finish, raisin and cinnamon carry off with very low heat. The dryness from the sherry truncates the flavors noticeably. On value: wouldn’t buy again. It’s good, it’s a fun experience, and it’s very full of flavor. Just not a repeat buy. UPDATE: Joseph Magnus lost to WT Revival in a blind taste test. WT now to go against the winner of the port wine finish bracket, TBD. This versus was ridiculously close. I actually preferred the body of this guy to the Revival. At the end of the day, my choice came down to smoothness, and Wild Turkey won big there. Joseph Magnus seems dominated by sherry, where Wild Turkey Revival, by comparison, seems merely influenced by it. To me, that makes the Joseph Magnus a good drink, and the Revival a great one.

I’ll have bourbons who live up to the hype for 100, Alex. This bourbon smells delicious. I’m getting caramel apples. Body has a bit of cherry flavor mixed with sweet tea and caramel. Absurdly smooth and low heat, start to finish. Finish trails off with lemon zest and ginger. There are times where this guy reminds me of the best parts of Russells Reserve. Times where it’s a Four Roses Limited from years back. Got some Wild Turkey 17 year in there. This genuinely is one of the more interesting bourbons I’ve had. 100% worth the money if you can find in on primary.

I get banana and sugar on the nose. Body is mild with leather and charred oak. Finish literally jumps off a cliff. Gone. A bit of the banana flavor in there, but it’s fleeting. As a bourbon fan, this little guy is just fine. Nothing fancy, nothing too special, but it’s sufficient.

Nose is pretty standard for a Booker’s, which to me means astringency, caramel, and sugar. This is where it deviates from the Booker’s I’ve had before. So image your quintessential Booker’s body. Strip all the flavors out of it except caramel. Imagine your quintessential Booker’s finish. Strip the flavors and the mouth feel, and replace it with saliva-flavored pop rocks. You got yourself a Teresa’s Batch. I can’t really call this iteration a loss or a win. It’s miles from my favorite entry, which is currently 2015-06. But it’s not bad, it’s just remarkably bland when compared back to back with other entries in the Booker’s line. And that finishing tongue feel.... holy crap. I mean I’ve definitely never felt anything quite like it, and it’s definitely interesting. I feel like I could hear the Rice Krispies in my mouth. I’m honestly not sure who this batch is for. Your Booker’s fans will be let down by lack of depth. Your newbies are gonna be put off by the pop rocks. Overall, I’d say this one is worth a try but not a buy. Go in with a friend.

No surprise that there’s rum on the nose. Coconut maybe? The sweetness hides the fact that it’s quite astringent. On the body, I can get the pickle juice flavors I’d expect in a rye, but they’re overpowered (in a good way) by sweet maple and coconut. Finish is a soft rye buzz, with the sweet flavors losing ground to the standard rye brininess. The rum in this is so influential that it deviates from rye much more than its port-finished brother deviates from bourbon. I now understand the argument I’ve heard that this shouldn’t still be called a rye. I disagree, but I get it. I think most rye fans would find this as a one-and-done entry in their shelf, but rye haters might find this more approachable. For me, I doubt I could have more than one drink of this on a given night.

As a rye novice, I’d classify this as a quintessential rye whiskey. And by that I mean: not a huge fan, and I may be drinking pickle juice with food coloring in it. There’s a strong industrial flavor from nose to finish. It’s similar to the Journeyman portfolio in that way. Possibly cedar? Other than that I get a paint thinner nose, body has a hint of—nope, never mind, it’s straight pickles. If you have in iPhone, open up messages and do an image search. Type in “hotdog face”. The one with the girl being hit in the face by a bunch of hotdogs? Yeah replace her face with mine and the hotdogs with pickles. That’s the finish.

Okay this is another one of those underrated bourbons. I feel like when folk rate whiskeys they don’t take into account the price point. Yes it’s great to have a $220 bottle of Angel’s Envy cask strength, but a lot of people don’t live in that world. We should expect a $220 bottle to be BAMF. But to me, that discovery pales in comparison to when a $45 bottle delivers a dynamic flavor like the big boys. Enter my new friend, Isaac. I get sangria on the nose. Like an authentic, home-made one. Tropical fruits, delicious. Body is gentle with vanilla and a deep cherry flavor. Finish is dry, with more of the sangria flavor trailing off. There’s a bit of watermelon in there too. This is delicious. If you’re a fan of Angel’s Envy, run (don’t walk) to your nearest liquor store and buy this. Right now. Compared to Angel’s Envy, it’s cheaper, more readily available, and for my tastes, it’s better. That’s right. I said it.

It’s fully hard to describe the aftertaste of all Journeyman whiskeys that I’ve ever had, but I will try. The nose of this one smells of paint thinner or rubbing alcohol. Genuinely doesn’t smell like something drinkable. Body is relatively smooth with a simple and subtle honey flavor, which becomes stronger on the finish alongside mild cinnamon. That aftertaste... Old pennies? Galvanized nails? It’s something that strikes a bourbon drinker as an impurity, but it’s in so much of their stuff that I think it has to be either part of their process or part of their raw materials. Not bad, not much to desire. Many many better things on shelves for cheaper.

Disclaimer: I came into this drink as a Basil Hayden’s hater. I get pear cider on the nose. Body delivers on the cider flavor without the sweetness. Very dry mouth feel with a very short, minty finish. It’s a one-trick-pony, and unfortunately, I’m not a big fan of the trick. The pear cider flavor is artificial and industrial, not tart, sweet, nor fresh. I prefer this to standard Basil Hayden’s, but there’s just too many better things out there to justify this purchase again in the future.

Nose is bitter and astringent, but not in a bad way. Sugary notes there. Body hits with vanilla and honey. Finish lingers for just a few seconds with a pleasant cinnamon buzz. Though pretty basic, this is a solid and affordable bourbon for the ABV. Big fan.