Barrell Craft Spirits Gray Label Bourbon 15 Year (2020 Release)

Exceptionally smooth. Caramel, vanilla, minimal burn. Last tasted 03/2021.

Super buttery first sip. Not super oaky. Dark cherry and some citrus on the palate. Very nice!

Part of 15 year sampler set. This was nice.

Nose - roasted peanut, orange vitamin, red berry, butterscotch, anise, cocoa, vanilla, tobacco, brown sugar, cinnamon, rich oak, moderate ethanol burn. Taste - orange vitamin, cherry, baked apple, leather, tobacco, cinnamon butter, dry oak, anise, peanut, dark chocolate, black pepper, toffee, vanilla, moderate alcohol bite, finishing medium length with orange vitamin, roasted peanut, and dry oak flavors. Next up is this 2020 version of the Barrell 15 Year release. I enjoyed the 2019 version, but I didn’t particularly like the dry, bitter quality or the Dickel influence. Well, this has a lot of Dickel in it as well, so let’s see how it stacks up. The nose is rich and fruity. Those roasted nuts and Dickel vitamins makes themselves immediately known. But unlike the 2019 release, this is richer and not nearly as dry. There’s a nice red berry notes alongside butterscotch and sweet tobacco aromas. The palate carries many of the same flavors, including the Dickel vitamins, a buttery cinnamon note, leather, and some dark chocolate. The mouthful is full and the finish is above average. So right off the bat, this is better than the 2019 release. However, the bitterness is still present and Dickel unmistakably pervades the entire experience. Nonetheless, this is great whiskey. If I appreciated Dickel more, this could be outstanding whiskey. Many thanks to @pkingmartin for providing the generous sample!

Rating: 19/23 N: I smell the proof, but not raw alcohol. I get substantial, toasty wood, but it doesn't seem over-oaked or one-dimensional. Barrel spices leap out. Lots of sweet peanuts, alongside a bit of sweet corn. The faintest orange note. Sort of a dry, tart cherry note leading into a little bit of slightly bitter, ever so faintly grassy herbs. The age is clearly there, the balance is terrific, and the scents are all very rounded with substantial nuance, but I wouldn't say that this is super complex on the nose. P: Sweet with bold wood. Plenty of barrel spices. Not as viscous of a mouthfeel as I'd expected. The proof does stand out. As I swish it, some herbs and peanut come out. A lot less peanut than I'd expected, but still plenty. There's a bit of a bitter layer that surprises me. The wood is a bit dry and just a bit over-oaked, taking a peanut shell character and pushing it a bit too far. A dry sort of pure barrel spice character comes out at times, turning into heavy minerals like the residue from hard water - or a heavier version of Dickel vitamin funk. There are some apple flavors here, but I'm really not getting the orange and cherry from the nose. OK, maybe a touch of floral cherry at points, but just the faintest amount. F: Dry, bitter wood. A little lingering sweetness. Definitely the barrel spices. This part of the experience is unfortunately forgettable. - Conclusion - My initial thought is that this is about on the same level as Resilient 15 Barrel #124 (18/23). It's quite enjoyable, but it's certainly not blowing me away. I do like the sweetness here better, but overall I really do get a similar Dickel profile from this. This is likewise pretty competitive with Booker's Shiny Barrel (19/23). I do like the smoothness and mellow maturity of this, but it's also not as full. I'd also put this around the same level as Old Forester 1920 (18/23), though the styles are certainly very different. I appreciate that the Old Forester is genuinely sweet and kind of decadent, whereas this has some nice sweetness, but it's partially obscured by a bitter layer and then there's the minerality keeping this from being big, bold, and decadent. The nuance here is quite nice though, with the spices in particular showing off a refined elegance at times. I'm mostly including this one as a sanity check, but this does indeed beat Uncle Nearest 1864 (15/23, though I'm thinking that it might really be more like a 16-17). As a second sanity check, there is no question that this is better than I.W. Harper 15 (14/23). On the other end, Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof (21/23) continues to crush the competition. Maybe this could reach a 20, but a 21 would be a very tough sell. After all of this, I'm thinking that this must be either an 18 or a 19. I love all of the mature nuance here, but then there's that over-oaked layer and the vitamin minerality just isn't really doing it for me. And at this proof, I really do want a fuller, more viscous palate. This is great, but it seems a lot like an especially good 15 year Dickel barrel pick. The problem with that is the price. This is better than my bottle of Resilient, but not by a lot and I've always been under the impression that barrel #124 of Resilient was of middling quality (or perhaps slightly lower). Considering how open Resilient is about their releases, I have to imagine that it's possible to find a just-as-good bottle of Resilient for half the price of this (or a not-quite-as-good bottle for a third of the price, in my case). I've very much enjoyed trying this, but I just don't get what all of the fuss is about it. I don't think I can give this a 20, but a 19 is definitely possible. It's either an 18 or a 19. My inclination is to go with a 19, but not a high 19. Thank you, @pkingmartin, for sharing this!