Tastes

I'm certainly no master distiller, but when Maker's Mark began finishing bourbon with wood staves--by placing the same wood staves that coopers use to make barrels loosely into existing barrels of bourbon--I initially turned my nose up at the practice. It didn't seem "natural" to me. It seemed like the bourbon was somehow being adulterated. But my palate soon disabused myself of this thinking, as I loved Maker's 46. MM has continued this practice with its Private Selection series, which uses five different staves with 1,001 different combinations. More recently, MM has introduced its "Wood Finishing Series" with one offering in each of 2019 and 2020, and two in 2021: FAE-01 in the Spring, and FAE-02 in the Fall. I've tried (and loved) both the FAE-01 and -02; but as it's hard to find, I only own the FAE-01. The staves are French oak, with only one side charred, exposing the bourbon to both extra char and raw wood (seasoned, i.e. dried outside; not kilned) on either side of the stave. Clear, classic tawny burnt orange color. Nose shows dried apricot, brown sugar, vanilla, buttered pancakes, raw split oak, and some ethanol (110.6 proof). Palate has a viscous, glycerin-like mouthfeel, with walnuts and oaky vanilla, finishing with leather and (still more) oaky vanilla. The oak is noticeable, but in a good way. Surprisingly little heat for the 110.6 proof. MM FAE-01 was Whisky Advocate's #2 whisk(e)y of 2021, with a retail price of $60. Online prices currently range from $120-160. N.B. All spirits tasted neat in a Glencairn glass.

Weller Showdown: Old Antique 107 vs Full Proof The W.L. Weller line is one of the many brands produced by Buffalo Trace (BT), and the distillery has expanded that line in recent years to include C.Y.P.B. (white label), Full Proof (WFP; blue label), and Single Barrel (WSB; brown label), on top of the already popular Special Reserve (WSR; green label), Antique 107 (WA107; red label), 12 Year (W12; black label), and William Larue Weller (part of the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection, or BTAC). Weller’s original lineup (excluding BTAC) was comprised of the lowest priced no-age-statement (NAS) WSR (90 proof); the higher proof NAS WA107 (107 proof); and W12, which is aged 12 years and is bottled at 90 proof like WSR. CYPB (“Craft Your Perfect Bourbon”) was a crowd-sourced marketing event, where users were asked about age, mashbill, warehouse location, and other items. CYPB carries an 8-year age statement and is bottled at 95 proof. WFP (not barrel proof) was then released with NAS and bottled at 114 proof. WSB is single-barrel like it’s cousins Blanton’s and Elmer T. Lee, and is NAS and bottled at 97 proof. Confused? We haven’t even gotten to prices. Because these bourbons are in such high demand, very few (if any) can be found at retail prices. Many consumers don’t even know what these bottles retail for, because they’re rarely available. But the state-run system in North Carolina publishes quarterly price lists for all bourbon to be sold in the state (a quick Internet search will uncover these lists, as well as slickly designed annual reports and other examples of government run amuck; but I digress). The four readers of this review may be shocked to know the following retail prices (rough “secondary” prices are in parentheses, with a “+” after each, because they’re frequently much higher): • WSR: $29.95 ($60+) • WA107: $49.95 ($125+) • W12: $44.95 ($350+) • CYPB: $49.95 ($800+) • WFP: $49.95 ($400+) • WSB: $50.35 ($800+) The point of all this? In order to popularize on its own cachet and insatiable market demand, BT has introduced additional brands into its Weller line, and two of the three new releases are NAS. And the difference between some of them are subtle. To BT’s credit, WA107 and WFP both have the same retail price ($49.95). This is justifiable, as they share the same mashbill; their age statements are not specified; and the proof difference is only seven points. Ostensibly WFP has lower production levels than WA107, and this may be the result of cherry-picking select rickhouses (warehouses) and ricks (racks). While specific locations can impact quality and flavor, we’re getting into hair-splitting territory. For most of us, these bourbons are only available at secondary prices (I did buy a case of WA107—actually single-barrel select from Fairway—for $36.99 per bottle a few years back, but that’s another story). If WA107 may be available for $125+, and WFP for $400+, and they share the same mashbill and retail price, and differ by just seven proof points, is there a reason to pay the extra $275—even if you could find it? I thought I’d try them side-by-side to find out. W107 Classic clear mahogany bourbon color. On the nose, caramel, vanilla, brown sugar, chocolate covered cherries, sweet pipe tobacco, roasted marshmallows (noted after trying the WFP), and some ethanol. Sweet palate reveals more brown sugar and some oaky tannins, finishing with some spiciness and lingering vanilla. Smooth for the 107 proof, with a soft bourbon burn. 4.25 points on the Distiller scale. WFP No discernable color difference from the WA107. Not identical in nose or palate, however. The WFP nose comes across as more focused, purer, and “intense” than the W107 (I don’t think 7 proof points alone would do this). It is also fruitier, with dried figs, prunes, and dates, along with cinnamon raisin oatmeal cookies and cedar. There is more heat on the palate, but this isn’t necessarily solely a function of the higher proof. Additional cinnamon transitions to more of a leathery finish, indicating possibly longer age (and/or floors or ricks). Very good. 4.5+ points on the Distiller scale. I was pleasantly surprised at the difference between these two bourbons (especially because I paid more than retail, but less than secondary, for the WFP). The skeptic in me was concerned that the gaps in the Weller line that have been filled with these newer brands was more sizzle than steak; but that does not appear to be the case with WA107 and WFP, in the humble opinion of this taster. I find the WFP noticeably better--though the WA107 is still a very good pour. Unless price is no object, stick with the WA107, or find friends who will pour you the WFP (if the lights are on in my barn, I’m pouring!). N.B. All spirits tasted neat in separate Glencairn glasses.

Weller Showdown: Old Antique 107 vs Full Proof The W.L. Weller line is one of the many brands produced by Buffalo Trace (BT), and the distillery has expanded that line in recent years to include C.Y.P.B. (white label), Full Proof (WFP; blue label), and Single Barrel (WSB; brown label), on top of the already popular Special Reserve (WSR; green label), Antique 107 (WA107; red label), 12 Year (W12; black label), and William Larue Weller (part of the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection, or BTAC). Weller’s original lineup (excluding BTAC) was comprised of the lowest priced no-age-statement (NAS) WSR (90 proof); the higher proof NAS WA107 (107 proof); and W12, which is aged 12 years and is bottled at 90 proof like WSR. CYPB (“Craft Your Perfect Bourbon”) was a crowd-sourced marketing event, where users were asked about age, mashbill, warehouse location, and other items. CYPB carries an 8-year age statement and is bottled at 95 proof. WFP (not barrel proof) was then released with NAS and bottled at 114 proof. WSB is single-barrel like it’s cousins Blanton’s and Elmer T. Lee, and is NAS and bottled at 97 proof. Confused? We haven’t even gotten to prices. Because these bourbons are in such high demand, very few (if any) can be found at retail prices. Many consumers don’t even know what these bottles retail for, because they’re rarely available. But the state-run system in North Carolina publishes quarterly price lists for all bourbon to be sold in the state (a quick Internet search will uncover these lists, as well as slickly designed annual reports and other examples of government run amuck; but I digress). The four readers of this review may be shocked to know the following retail prices (rough “secondary” prices are in parentheses, with a “+” after each, because they’re frequently much higher): • WSR: $29.95 ($60+) • WA107: $49.95 ($125+) • W12: $44.95 ($350+) • CYPB: $49.95 ($800+) • WFP: $49.95 ($400+) • WSB: $50.35 ($800+) The point of all this? In order to popularize on its own cachet and insatiable market demand, BT has introduced additional brands into its Weller line, and two of the three new releases are NAS. And the difference between some of them are subtle. To BT’s credit, WA107 and WFP both have the same retail price ($49.95). This is justifiable, as they share the same mashbill; their age statements are not specified; and the proof difference is only seven points. Ostensibly WFP has lower production levels than WA107, and this may be the result of cherry-picking select rickhouses (warehouses) and ricks (racks). While specific locations can impact quality and flavor, we’re getting into hair-splitting territory. For most of us, these bourbons are only available at secondary prices (I did buy a case of WA107—actually single-barrel select from Fairway—for $36.99 per bottle a few years back, but that’s another story). If WA107 may be available for $125+, and WFP for $400+, and they share the same mashbill and retail price, and differ by just seven proof points, is there a reason to pay the extra $275—even if you could find it? I thought I’d try them side-by-side to find out. W107 Classic clear mahogany bourbon color. On the nose, caramel, vanilla, brown sugar, chocolate covered cherries, sweet pipe tobacco, roasted marshmallows (noted after trying the WFP), and some ethanol. Sweet palate reveals more brown sugar and some oaky tannins, finishing with some spiciness and lingering vanilla. Smooth for the 107 proof, with a soft bourbon burn. 4.25 points on the Distiller scale. WFP No discernable color difference from the WA107. Not identical in nose or palate, however. The WFP nose comes across as more focused, purer, and “intense” than the W107 (I don’t think 7 proof points alone would do this). It is also fruitier, with dried figs, prunes, and dates, along with cinnamon raisin oatmeal cookies and cedar. There is more heat on the palate, but this isn’t necessarily solely a function of the higher proof. Additional cinnamon transitions to more of a leathery finish, indicating possibly longer age (and/or floors or ricks). Very good. 4.5+ points on the Distiller scale. I was pleasantly surprised at the difference between these two bourbons (especially because I paid more than retail, but less than secondary, for the WFP). The skeptic in me was concerned that the gaps in the Weller line that have been filled with these newer brands was more sizzle than steak; but that does not appear to be the case with WA107 and WFP, in the humble opinion of this taster. I find the WFP noticeably better--though the WA107 is still a very good pour. Unless price is no object, stick with the WA107, or find friends who will pour you the WFP (if the lights are on in my barn, I’m pouring!). N.B. All spirits tasted neat in separate Glencairn glasses.

Earlier this year I attended a bourbon tasting with Rabbit Hole's founder, Kaveh Zamanian. I'd seen some of Rabbit Hole's bottlings at local stores, but had never tried them. The tasting changed that, and I was converted. Kaveh is building a world-class distillery that is focused on quality. I've been able to purchase the Dareringer and Cavehill locally, but had been unable to find the Heigold. This past weekend I visited New Hampshire and found some in one of NH's state-owned liquor stores at $50--roughly $15 below what I've seen online--and pulled the trigger. Clear oiled-teak color. Sweet nose shows caramel, vanilla, orange blossom, some ethanol, and licorice. On the palate, bitter orange, char, and a dusting of spicy white pepper. Vanilla lingers on the finish. Overall impression is sweet and easy drinking, with some rye spiciness (the Heigold is RH's high-rye mashbill: 70% corn, 25% malted rye, and 5% malted barley). The 95 proof is not as apparent as the number would suggest. The age is only "over 3 years," suggesting that the best is yet to come. N.B. All spirits tasted neat in a Glencairn glass.

“Oban” means “Little Bay" in Gaelic; thus this is “Little Bay Little Bay.” LB2 is a no-age statement (NAS) whisky; the distillery says that it “takes mature small batch Oban Single malt” without quantifying what exactly “mature” means. It then finishes them in smaller barrels, providing more wood exposure. Deep tawny gold color. Complex, fruity nose has the classic Oban ripe pear, with honey, quince, guava, and fig preserves on toast. Viscous mouthfeel reveals orange chocolate, light ethanol, faint peat, and white pepper, finishing with some pleasantly drying leather, a whiff of smokiness, and bitter chocolate. 43% ABV. LB2 has more intensity than the Oban 14 or 18, with a more robust flavor profile, not dissimilar to the Distiller’s Edition (minus the sherry cask finishing). At around $50, this is one of the best scotch whisky values out there, combining complexity and easy-drinking sweetness that is appealing to both afficionado and neophyte alike. 4.25 on the Distiller scale. N.B. All spirits tasted neat in a Glencairn glass.

BTAC Showdown: George T. Stagg (2019 release) vs William Larue Weller (2019 release) George T. Stagg and William Larue Weller, part of the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection (BTAC), need no introduction here. While these are scarce “collectible” bottles, I purchased them both to drink and share with fellow afficionados (not just plain friends!). Both were purchased on a trip out of state on a bourbon-hunting foray: the Stagg was by itself at one store, but the WLW was part of a set at another store that the owner would not separate. That set included WLW, Weller Full Proof, Weller CYPB, Weller 12, Weller 107, and Weller Special Reserve. I really wasn’t interested in the W107 or WSR, as I already had some of both; but I didn’t have much choice in the matter. I paid plenty for the lot, after considerable back and forth (the shop was on the way to Augusta, Georgia, and the owner insisted that the group looked good in his store for people going to The Masters—I tried not to laugh—did he want to sell or not?), but in hindsight the entire lot was well below secondary for just one WLW today. While both of these bourbons are part of BTAC, they have different mashbills. Buffalo Trace provides very detailed information in their Release Letter for each bourbon. George T. Stagg • Mashbill: Kentucky corn (Distillers Grade #1 and #2), Minnesota Rye, and North Dakota malted barley • Barrel: new, white oak, #4 char • Proof: 116.9 • Distillation: Spring 2014 • Release: Fall 2019 • Age: 15 years, 3 months Clear, dark mahogany color, as one would expect from a 15-year-old bourbon. Nose offers pipe tobacco, cedar, oatmeal raisin cookie, bergamot, some underlying vanilla, and noticeable cool mint. (Tasted again after the WLW, both caramel and rye are more noticeable on the nose). Palate shows some pleasant heat, barrel char, and leather notes, leading to pepper, oak, and vanilla on the long finish. Overall, the Stagg comes across as slightly more woody than the WLW, consistent with the increased age—but not in a negative way. Very, very good. 4.75 on the Distiller scale. William Larue Weller • Mashbill: Kentucky corn (Distillers Grade #1 and #2), North Dakota wheat, North Dakota malted barley • Barrel: new, white oak, #4 char • Proof: 128.0 • Distillation: Winter 2007 • Release: Fall 2019 • Age: 12 years, 6 months Clear, dark mahogany color, virtually indistinguishable from the Stagg, despite being roughly three years younger. Complex nose shows carrot cake, luxardo cherries, honey, pomander, and even barbecue sauce. Pleasant, almost pillowy, penetrating, mouthcoating palate where the high proof makes its presence known. Long finish, culminating in a smooth, well-integrated, oaky vanilla. Incredibly smooth considering the 128 proof. An iconic, benchmark bourbon against which any other can be measured. 5.0 on the Distiller scale. George T. Stagg and William Larue Weller are two incredibly well-made, top-of-the-line bourbons. There is no marketing fluff here. There’s no “hipness.” This is old-school, top-quality bourbon that is a pleasure to savor. The GTS is a bit more leathery and woody, almost rough-hewn, whereas the WLW is more smooth, more refined. Think Clint Eastwood in his prime (Stagg) vs Roger Moore in his (WLW). Both alpha, apex performers at the top of their (slightly different) games. N.B. All spirits always tasted neat from a Glencairn glass

BTAC Showdown: George T. Stagg (2019 release) vs William Larue Weller (2019 release) George T. Stagg and William Larue Weller, part of the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection (BTAC), need no introduction here. While these are scarce “collectible” bottles, I purchased them both to drink and share with fellow afficionados (not just plain friends!). Both were purchased on a trip out of state on a bourbon-hunting foray: the Stagg was by itself at one store, but the WLW was part of a set at another store that the owner would not separate. That set included WLW, Weller Full Proof, Weller CYPB, Weller 12, Weller 107, and Weller Special Reserve. I really wasn’t interested in the W107 or WSR, as I already had some of both; but I didn’t have much choice in the matter. I paid plenty for the lot, after considerable back and forth (the shop was on the way to Augusta, Georgia, and the owner insisted that the group looked good in his store for people going to The Masters—I tried not to laugh—did he want to sell or not?), but in hindsight the entire lot was well below secondary for just one WLW today. While both of these bourbons are part of BTAC, they have different mashbills. Buffalo Trace provides very detailed information in their Release Letter for each bourbon. George T. Stagg • Mashbill: Kentucky corn (Distillers Grade #1 and #2), Minnesota Rye, and North Dakota malted barley • Barrel: new, white oak, #4 char • Proof: 116.9 • Distillation: Spring 2014 • Release: Fall 2019 • Age: 15 years, 3 months Clear, dark mahogany color, as one would expect from a 15-year-old bourbon. Nose offers pipe tobacco, cedar, oatmeal raisin cookie, bergamot, some underlying vanilla, and noticeable cool mint. (Tasted again after the WLW, both caramel and rye are more noticeable on the nose). Palate shows some pleasant heat, barrel char, and leather notes, leading to pepper, oak, and vanilla on the long finish. Overall, the Stagg comes across as slightly more woody than the WLW, consistent with the increased age—but not in a negative way. Very, very good. 4.75 on the Distiller scale. William Larue Weller • Mashbill: Kentucky corn (Distillers Grade #1 and #2), North Dakota wheat, North Dakota malted barley • Barrel: new, white oak, #4 char • Proof: 128.0 • Distillation: Winter 2007 • Release: Fall 2019 • Age: 12 years, 6 months Clear, dark mahogany color, virtually indistinguishable from the Stagg, despite being roughly three years younger. Complex nose shows carrot cake, luxardo cherries, honey, pomander, and even barbecue sauce. Pleasant, almost pillowy, penetrating, mouthcoating palate where the high proof makes its presence known. Long finish, culminating in a smooth, well-integrated, oaky vanilla. Incredibly smooth considering the 128 proof. An iconic, benchmark bourbon against which any other can be measured. 5.0 on the Distiller scale. George T. Stagg and William Larue Weller are two incredibly well-made, top-of-the-line bourbons. There is no marketing fluff here. There’s no “hipness.” This is old-school, top-quality bourbon that is a pleasure to savor. The GTS is a bit more leathery and woody, almost rough-hewn, whereas the WLW is more smooth, more refined. Think Clint Eastwood in his prime (Stagg) vs Roger Moore in his (WLW). Both alpha, apex performers at the top of their (slightly different) games. N.B. All spirits always tasted neat from a Glencairn glass

CORN WHISKEY SHOWDOWN: Balcones Baby Blue vs Mellow Corn In some respects, corn whiskey is bourbon’s “purer” older brother. The mashbill for corn whiskey has to be at least 80% corn (compared to at least 51% for bourbon), and there is neither an age nor barrel requirement. Straight corn whiskey has the same mashbill requirements, and must be aged in new or used oak barrels for at least two years. Balcones Baby Blue is labeled Corn Whisky (no “e”), while Mellow Corn is labeled Straight Corn Whiskey, with the addition that it is Bottled in Bond, which means that it’s also 100 proof and aged four years. Balcones Baby Blue (3.75): color of clear turbinado sugar. Breakfast nose serves up maple syrup, Jiffy cornbread, cinnamon, buttered toast, and a whiff of bacon. On the palate, there is some initial heat, followed by brown sugar and vanilla, with lingering vanilla on the finish. Balcones is a distiller that I’m paying more attention to; I recently reviewed their Texas Pot Still bourbon and liked it. Mellow Corn (3.25): bright gold color. Nose offers subtle green banana, summer grass, light butterscotch, light oaky vanilla and ethanol. There is a light glycerin mouthfeel, with a little more heat than the Baby Blue (consistent with the higher 100 proof), some vanilla, and white pepper and vanilla on the finish. I’m 80% done with this bottle, but it’s a nice change of pace to go downmarket and experience other American whiskies. I’ll keep a bottle on hand. I’ll bet it goes well with my pecan-smoked pork butts and Brunswick stew. And I love the 1940s-era label. Balcones Baby Blue is definitely the more complex and nuanced of the two, and is available for around $35; but Mellow Corn is a higher proof, and while not too complex, drinks well and is widely available at roughly $15. While it is usually found on the bottom shelf at the liquor store, it drinks far better than most bottom-shelf whiskies. And while it’s arguably monolithic, so is Compass Box Hedonism (reviewed yesterday) for 8-10x the price. N.B. All spirits tasted neat in a Glencairn glass.

CORN WHISKEY SHOWDOWN: Balcones Baby Blue vs Mellow Corn In some respects, corn whiskey is bourbon’s “purer” older brother. The mashbill for corn whiskey has to be at least 80% corn (compared to at least 51% for bourbon), and there is neither an age nor barrel requirement. Straight corn whiskey has the same mashbill requirements, and must be aged in new or used oak barrels for at least two years. Balcones Baby Blue is labeled Corn Whisky (no “e”), while Mellow Corn is labeled Straight Corn Whiskey, with the addition that it is Bottled in Bond, which means that it’s also 100 proof and aged four years. Balcones Baby Blue (3.75): color of clear turbinado sugar. Breakfast nose serves up maple syrup, Jiffy cornbread, cinnamon, buttered toast, and a whiff of bacon. On the palate, there is some initial heat, followed by brown sugar and vanilla, with lingering vanilla on the finish. Balcones is a distiller that I’m paying more attention to; I recently reviewed their Texas Pot Still bourbon and liked it. Mellow Corn (3.25): bright gold color. Nose offers subtle green banana, summer grass, light butterscotch, light oaky and ethanol. There is a light glycerin mouthfeel, with a little more heat than the Baby Blue (consistent with the higher 100 proof), some vanilla, and white pepper and vanilla on the finish. I’m 80% done with this bottle, but it’s a nice change of pace to go downmarket and experience other American whiskies. I’ll keep a bottle on hand. I’ll bet it goes well with my pecan-smoked pork butts and Brunswick stew. And I love the 1940s-era label. Balcones Baby Blue is definitely the more complex and nuanced of the two, and is available for around $35; but Mellow Corn is a higher proof, and while not too complex, drinks well and is widely available at roughly $15. While it is usually found on the bottom shelf at the liquor store, it drinks far better than most bottom-shelf whiskies. And while it’s arguably monolithic, so is Compass Box Hedonism (reviewed yesterday) for 8-10x the price. N.B. All spirits tasted neat in a Glencairn glass.

I purchased this bottle a couple years ago based in part on the Distiller rating--97 points from Stephanie Moreno (who I've already learned isn't too correlated with my palate--which is not a knock on her--see my review on Glendronach Allardice 18 Year). Compass Box and John Glaser are iconoclasts in the scotch industry, and do have a quality ethos (this bottle has no added coloring and is non-chill filtered; reports suggest the various distillates are aged from 15 to more than 20 years). I tried Hedonism a couple times immediately after purchasing and recall being unimpressed, although I didn't write a specific note. That opinion is essentially unchanged. Dried hay color. Hedonism is aged in bourbon barrels, and oaky vanilla is present on the nose (the label screams "RICH * VANILLA * ALLURING" in case savorers couldn't notice), as well as Cheerios cereal and milk chocolate. The palate does have a viscous, glycerin-like quality (again, label: "RICH") with more oak and a touch of white pepper (normal scotch-like 43% ABV), finishing with some light, slightly bitter woody tannins. Distiller is massively off-base with this score. The defining characteristics are the label's "RICH" and "VANILLA" minus the "ALLURING." It's not bad; it's just boring. Scotch has such a wide array of styles, smells, and flavors; and there are dozens of them that are far less monolithic, much more complex, and objectively better than this one. And it gets worse when one considers value: prices today range from $100-130 (I paid about $90 as I recall). That's awfully expensive for rich vanilla with a pedestrian ABV. N.B. All spirits tasted neat in a Glencairn glass.