Rating: 13/23 N: Kind of spicy with wood and mineral. A bit dusty with a faint hint of that Jim Beam peanut. Some tartness from the mash makes it through. There might be a hint of smoke. P: This is without doubt a Beam product. It has that lightness to its profile and some of the usual dusty peanut. Compared with Knob Creek Single Barrel 9 Year 120 Proof, this has very little fullness. Evan Williams Bottled In Bond is also substantially fuller. The profile is quite dry and far from full. There's a little bit of smoke or char on top of mineral (almost a Dickel vitamin flavor) and some dusty peanut. Despite the peanut, I wouldn't say that this is very rich. The peanut does go well with the bit of sourness from the mash that makes its way in here. There are suggestions of vanilla, faint licorice, and barrel spices (pepper, cinnamon, clove), but they are not terribly strong. Although there is some spicy heat, this isn't a very harsh bourbon. Largely, the profile is char with mineral. Although I get some decent complexity and maturity (more maturity than from Buffalo Trace, at least) out of this, the base distillate's flavor is a bit of a problem and so is the amount of bitterness it picked up from the barrel char. F: The bitterness, minerals, and sourness remain the longest, with the sourness fading faster than either the bitterness or the minerals. - Conclusion - I was looking forward to trying this bourbon that I'd heard so much excitement about in the past, but it's been a real disappointment. There's too much char and mineral. Furthermore, like probably all of the other Beam products I've tried, there's something lacking in the middle of the profile. Booker's has just enough complexity to get by considering it's fullness and richness from its high ABV, but even Knob Creek bottled at 120 proof shows this deficiency. This one, however, makes the problem really apparent. My overall impression here is that this is not so immature as a bottle of plain old Jim Beam, but it does taste like a rejected batch of Jim Beam Black. While Jim Beam Black is a solid enough bourbon and this is pretty close to it in both price and quality (and this is even bottled at a higher proof), I just had higher hopes here. I also faulted Evan Williams Bottled In Bond for its lack of boldness and I think it's kind of in the same ballpark as this. The Evan Williams is a bit oilier and hotter, whereas this comes across as more mature and complex. I would say that the Evan Williams probably has the fuller flavor though. Ancient Ancient Age 10 Star is another one that beats this in terms of fullness, though at least the sweetness in the Ancient Ancient Age does help to fill it out. Still, the Ancient Ancient Age wins handily. This is growing on me with its mellowness and decent complexity. It's pretty easy to just sit and sip, but I don't see myself ever loving it. Side-by-side, Jim Beam's Pre-Prohibition Rye seems like a more finely crafted product. Although that's a pretty solid rye, it isn't quite up to sipping standards and this seems even lower. Russell's Reserve 10 actually taste quite fruity, sweet, and full when compared with this. Russell's Reserve 10 is normally quite subdued with some minerality but also dignity. The dignity remains in comparison with this (though this actually comes across as fairly dignified as well), but the contrast in fullness of flavor and the higher quality flavors that I get out of Russell's put this clearly behind it. This is drier, smokier, and woodier. The sweetness here is more in line with light caramel. The more I compare them, the more I'm surprised by how close they are in quality. As I contemplate this more, I'm increasingly impressed by its refinement. It has a profile that I'm not a big fan of, but it executes it in a matured way.I've gone from 11 to 15 on this and I'm now thinking that it's more of a 12 to 15. As I contemplate further, this is doesn't seem as rich, mature, or complex as Russell's Reserve 10 by a solid margin. This is looking like a 12 to 14 now. I'm thinking a 13.