Tastes

A year ago this was the second whisky I tried. I thought it was better than Jack Daniel's - certainly good enough to keep trying whisky. After a year I figured I'm better equipped to properly evaluate the stuff, and now I have a Glencairn too. It turns out that this is worse than I remembered. Nose: Alcohol, dark chocolate, candy corn, grass - it's an unpleasant nose. Taste: Chocolate and corn, with a thin mouthfeel. Finish: Short, with nothing but a thin oak.

A year ago I began drinking whisky with a glass of this stuff. I thought it tasted awful. After a year, and with a Glencairn glass to better appreciate it, I thought I'd try it again. It turns out it's not as bad as I remembered, though it certainly is at the bottom of the whisky scale. Nose: Everything's weak - I got alcohol, vanilla, and something fruity that could have been apples or bubblegum. Taste: The mouthfeel is watery, and the only notes I got were corn and a very faint oak. Finish: All I got was oak, with a medium length. This was the least pleasant part of the whole thing.

I got a 375ml bottle at Total Wine in Albuquerque for $29.99. There's no age statement, and it's 90.4 proof. The mash bill is 72% corn, 18% rye, and 10% malted barley. The color in the glass is a deep copper-gold. NOSE: Begins with a heavy (but pleasant) woody caramel note, which reminds me of Balcones Texas Pot Still Bourbon. Then there are vanilla, bananas, butterscotch, toasted oak, hardwood smoke (which reminds me of Balcones Brimstone smoked corn whisky, though it's not oppressive like the Brimstone), melted butter, salt water, and apples. TASTE: Honey, lemon, a different sort of citrus which I think may be kumquats (though it's been a long time since I ate a kumquat), salt, caramel, a little oak, and cinnamon toast. FINISH: Long, with just one note - a pleasant toasted oak. This is the only place where I really experienced any alcohol burn.

I got a pint at "my" Total Wine for $17.99, and it's well worth the price. The only reason I didn't give it five stars is that it's just a hair short of being as good as whiskies that I have given that high a rating to. The mash bill is 72% corn, 18% rye, and 10% barley. It's 90.4 proof, and is dark copper in the glass. NOSE: The nose is warm, and so gentle that if I didn't know better I'd say this was a wheated bourbon. I got notes of apple, butter, something woody that makes me think of a paneled room, roasting ears, butterscotch, and vanilla. TASTE: The mouthfeel is fairly creamy, and it just feels good. I got notes of baked buttered apples, butter, grapes, honey, and spice, but I'm sure that as I work my way into the bottle I'll find more. This whisky isn't giving up everything with the first glass, I don't think. FINISH: Corn and oak - medium in length.

This isn't a very complex whisky, but it's the best simple whisky I've ever had. It constantly amazes me that it's so good while still as simple as it is. A fifth cost me $34.99 at "my" Total Wine. It's a 90 proof whisky, and is copper/gold in the glass. The mash bill is 51% wheat, 37% corn, and 12% malted barley. This whisky ages for seven years. NOSE: Caramel, butterscotch, butter. TASTE: Honey butter, puffed wheat, lemon, bread crust. FINISH: Short - honey and a little oak. I don't know that I'll try to always have a bottle of this whisky on hand, but I'll definitely buy it again.

I got a quart for $7.99 here in Albuquerque, and it's not even worth that. This is one of the simplest, apparently youngest whiskies I've had - it's mediocre at best. The mash bill is 78% corn, 10% rye, and 12% barley, and it's 86 proof. In the glass it's a dark wheat color. There's no age statement, though since it's straight bourbon it had to age at least two years. NOSE: Caramel, vanilla, rubbing alcohol. TASTE: The mouthfeel is thin and watery, and the sole note is honey. FINISH: Medium, with nothing but oak. This might do in a mixed drink, and I'll probably try it mixed with some Buffalo Trace White Dog to give it flavor and authority, but drinking it straight will always be a disappointment.

I got just a quart (375ml) since I didn't know whether I'd like this whisky - it cost me $18.99. A fifth would of course be more. This whisky is 93.7 proof, which I like since I prefer higher proof juice. According to unofficial information I found online the mash bill is 75% corn, 15% rye, and 10% barley. In the glass it's the color of new copper, and there's no age statement. NOSE: I found it very hard to get at the nose. Alcohol comes right out of the glass, but any other notes are hard to tease out. This is the only whisky I've ever come across which at first seemed like it had no aroma at all. But finally I was able to discern vanilla, caramel, a tinge of grass, creamed corn, caramel apples, and dark toast. TASTE: Butterscotch, buttered corn, buttered honey, dark toast. I expected a more complex taste after I finally was able to get such complexity out of the nose, but nope, this is all there was. FINISH: The finish is long, and begins with a little too much oak. Finally some honey comes in, a buttery note, and some very faint grass. This is a good bourbon, but not a great one. It would be worth a price about three dollars lower; at $19 it's a little overpriced. But it is good.

I got this for $24.49 (375ml) at Total Wine. It's 125 proof, the maximum proof that white dog can be going into the barrel, and it's Buffalo Trace's #1 mash bill, which seems to be 75% corn, 10% rye, and 15% barley. NOSE: I immediately got a creamy sweetness which I suspect is the large corn component of the mash bill. Then came a little bit of slightly charred grain, melted butter, puffed wheat, dark chocolate, and something musty and woody. Finally there's something nutty, and a sourness. It's surprisingly complex on the nose; I never expected unaged whisky to have so much in the nose. There is much less burn from the alcohol than I expected given the proof - I had to put my nose right down into the glass to get any sting. TASTE: This is simpler than the nose, containing a beginning sweet note, then corn, butter, and again the nutty and sour notes. There's plenty of alcohol here, but the burn is considerably less than I expected from a 125-proof liquor. FINISH: This is long, but it's the simplest aspect of this whisky - it's just a woody note, with the recurrent sourness. I don't believe I'll buy another bottle of this, but for what it is, it isn't bad at all.

I got a fifth for $29.99 at the Mountain Run location of Kelly Liquors here in Albuquerque. It's 80 proof, which is lower than I generally like but didn't hurt the whisky in this case. There's no age statement, but since it's straight bourbon it had to age for at least two years. It's a nice golden straw color in the glass. NOSE: Bananas, butterscotch, and a faint medicinal/grass note which I didn't care for, but which didn't mar the taste. TASTE: Butterscotch, butter, brown sugar, coffee cake, and a tiny bit of oak. FINISH: There's an oak note which is there throughout, ad which lingers, making this a medium finish. And right at the beginning there's a very short but definite impression of cool spring water. Overall this isn't a very complex bourbon, especially in the nose and the finish, but it's a very good bourbon. It doesn't necessarily drink better than its price, but for what I paid, I definitely got what I paid for.

I got this on someone's recommendation because it's a wheated bourbon, and he knows I like Maker's Mark. I got a fifth for $28.99 at Kelly Liquors in Albuquerque. It's 92 proof, and comes from a mash bill of 68% corn, 20% wheat, and 12% malted barley. There's no age statement, but it had to age at least two years to be a straight bourbon. I first tasted it right after I'd had a bad cold, and it took a month for my palate to get back to normal; this is the third or fourth glass I've had from the bottle, and the first one which I liked without reservation. The nose presents caramel, apple, and butterscotch notes. The taste begins with cereal, then moves on to oak, and then chocolate. The finish is short, and consists of chocolate and oak. I wonder how much of what I tasted previous was artifacts of my retreating cold, since on previous occasions I detected notes that I didn't tonight, including a hay or grass note that I've never liked no matter where I've found it. Tonight I found Larceny to be a pretty simple bourbon, but a much better one than I'd previously experienced. I'd begun to think I'd just chuck the bottle, but if it's going to taste like this from now on, I'll keep it. It isn't complex and intense enough to rate four or five stars, but it's a lot better than some I've tried.