Is it possible for Balcones to produce a bad whisky? This is the fourth bottle from Waco that I've tasted, and I've loved every single one. As with all the other Balcones whiskies I've had, this one drinks like a whisky that sells for more than I actually paid. This is a 100% corn whisky, and it's 106 proof. According to the label it's aged for "AT LEAST ONE DAY," but whether that means only one day or more than one day I don't know. The color, though, is too dark for me to believe that it was less than a few months. Corn whisky, of course, has no minimum aging requirement. The color in the glass is that of wheat straw, with just a slight reddish tinge. On the NOSE I got smoke right off the bat; this was the main note. There was also alcohol, which isn't surprising at that proof. And there's something sweet in the nose as well, though what specifically I couldn't identify. The TASTE is as unique as all the Balcones whiskies I've had. It begins with something sweet that, as with the nose, I couldn't identify. Then comes the smoke, honey, oak (different from the smokiness), and an alcohol burn. The FINISH is long, beginning with alcohol that moves from the front to the back, and with oak and smoke following, also moving from front to back and lingering in the throat. I don't know exactly what a smoked whisky is, but this whisky is glorious. It's a simple whisky, but Balcones does such good things with its juice that it drinks like something much more complex. At $49.99 a fifth I won't be able to keep this stuff on hand all the time, but it is well worth the price; I'd be willing to pay $60 or more, if I had it, for this whisky.